Typhoon?
 

I am largely unsighted and out of touch with the rationale (standby for banter), but why, when we have a multi-role, multi million pound aircraft are they not deployed on Op Shader when they did deploy for a limited period to Ellamy. It's rather unpalatable to justify their lack of involvement if we don't have enough/serviceability to cover QRA and an Op Deployment. This isn't trolling this is a genuine question. If it's just that it's the sensible abrogation of resources then I understand but if it's not what message does that send when SDSR is just round the corne? Any thoughts?

No airshows on Shader mate, thats why....:ok::E

Serious answer....No Brimstone, Raptor, limited number of PW4 capable airframes for a start.

The air-to-ground capability which Typhoon used on ELLAMY, and which still exists today, is basic: Paveway II and Enhanced PW2 only. These have 1000lb warheads and the fuses are not programmable (for airburst, variable delay, etc) from the cockpit, which reduces flexibility especially when targeting in built-up areas. By contrast the PW4 has a smaller warhead and cockpit-programmable features.

As downsizer says, advanced weapons like PW4, Brimstone and Storm Shadow are not fully operational on Typhoon yet. To answer the obvious follow-up question, they will be, in time for Tornado's planned retirement. PW4 has been trialled and Storm Shadow has recently had its first flight. Only Tranche 2 and later aircraft will be able to carry any of those weapons, and those aircraft are still in delivery. Even if enough PW4-capable aircraft could be mustered today, there's no prospect of Brimstone capability until much nearer Tornado's retirement date - and given how critical that weapon is, it will determine Typhoon's deployability on SHADER.

Why is it taking so long to get the weapons integrated? Answer: the other partner nations do not have the same degree of interest in adding air-to-ground capability to Typhoon. Some of them bought it purely as an air-to-air platform. Getting UK-specific weapons into the multinational programme of works requires give-and-take with other nations' priorities. The only way to do it quicker would be to go UDI with the desired configurations, but the aircraft would then be outside the master programme and (presumably) much more expensive to administer. With a cynical hat on, I could observe that the status quo protects Tornado quite nicely in SDSR. Deletion would be on the cards if Typhoon was already capable of augmenting it!

Also, Typhoon does more than just QRA - don't forget the Falklands and a recurring NATO commitment in the Baltics. They probably do have the capacity for more, but until they have the capability, there is not much point.

ES
 

What were you thinking? A considered and reasoned response. That's not how this place works. Have a word with yourself.
BV:E

And the ISIS Int O thanks you too.

Avtur,

No information here that ISIS can use for anything other then knowing for a fact, that the stuff that just hit them was not dropped by a Typhoon.....

So that's Typhoon struck off the ORBAT. Every little helps as they say at Tesco.

If it had slipped ISIL's attention that there are no Typhoons in Akrotiri, and they had missed all the news coverage of the repeated extensions of the third Tornado squadron (why bother if Typhoon was ready?), then I'm sure they will have missed the NAO's Major Projects Report, which lays out in excruciating detail the cost and timeline of the aforementioned upgrades (pssst... including something to do with a radar... but that must actually be sensitive because it's redacted).

See page 162 onwards

Blanket stonewalling on security grounds has long since been consigned to history. Any infinitesimal value that the enemy may gain from aggregation of unclassified information must be weighed against the cost to our own side of ill-informed internal debate resulting from an information vacuum. It is important to keep our own people on-message!

Thanks Easy! Complex arguments brilliantly encapsulated in a single phrase...

Thank you, so in effect our operational effectiveness is being hamstrung by our partners and there is a risk that we could not have a truly multi-role, multi-weapon system in time to retire Tornado. This aircraft is hardly new to the inventory and I fear this is a costly white elephant that is less capable and more needy than the aircraft it was brought in to rreplace. Thank you for the clear explanation E.S.

We could always go to the bone yard and ask the cousins for a few Harriers... ;)

Surely this is a bit overly dramatic? It seems that the the idea is to get value for money out of the older aircraft first. This may not have been the best idea from the point of view of exports but surely the Typhoon will be an excellent replacement when the time comes and will grow into an enormous improvement? In the meantime, presumably when Typhoons are based in the Baltic republics they earn their keep as a quite serious deterrent?

Not really, we got what we paid for then wanted more. We rushed through dumb bomb clearance about 10 years ago, maybe not as far back as that, and also the gun.

There is obviously a queue for updates and while Typhoon might be nice to have now it is clearly not necessary as it would bring nothing new to the party. As said, it is employed elsewhere where the Tornado has no capability.

If there had been enough personnel and budget to consider running another fleet of fast jets, it would have been better to spend them on retaining more squadrons of Tornado, which would have allowed the maintenance of a greater weight of effort than seen presently. The pre-2011 plan was to retire Tornado in 2025, not 2019, so there would have been plenty of airframes available with which to run 5+ squadrons (which, granted, might have brought the OSD forward a bit) which in turn would have reduced the time pressure on the Typhoon upgrade programmes. But there are not enough people and not enough money, so a pointless argument.

I wonder why the old expression, "Fitted for, but not with", comes to mind....:hmm:

Jack

I think that comment got lost and should have been on the F35 thread.........

He probably has a subscription to Air Forces Monthly already, where in last month's issue was a lengthy article going into the air-ground weapons integration programme on the Typhoon in great detail.

ORAC,

I think you'll find that F-35 is already more capable than the Typhoon, we just need a few more of them. ;)

I guess that depends on what you count as capability. Not being able to fly in typical UK weather would appear to be quite a disadvantage….

JTO,

Where did you get that piece of information? I wouldn't believe everything you read about F-35 on the internet ;)