• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Eurofighter 'fully combat ready'

Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
6,926
Likes
65
#1
The RAF is to declare the Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft capable of carrying out ground attacks, as well as its original air defence role.

The hi-tech fighter jets costing £67m each have been upgraded and training exercises have been taking place.

Critics say the Typhoon is an outdated Cold War weapon, unsuitable for modern wars against terrorists and insurgents.

But the RAF says the upgrade means the fighter will be able to operate more effectively in Iraq and Afghanistan.

BBC defence correspondent Caroline Wyatt says the need for a operationally flexible aircraft has been highlighted by current operations where battles are fought against a mobile enemy without an air force.

The new equipment fitted to the Typhoon includes a laser designator pod which enables data to be downloaded to laptop style devices held by forward air controllers on the ground.

This is not yet Afghanistan - it's the Nevada desert and an excercise called Green Flag West



Last test for the Typhoon

By seeing exactly what is coming through the Typhoon's pod the controllers can guide a pilot onto the target, which can then be destroyed with pinpoint accuracy.

The RAF describes the improved Typhoon as "a new generation of aircraft" with technology that increases the amount of information available to the pilot.

Commander-in-Chief of the RAF, Air Chief Marshal Sir Clive Loader said: "The declaration of Typhoon being multi-role capable is a truly significant step in the development of this remarkable aircraft.

"This latest capability upgrade gives the Royal Air Force the most operationally flexible aircraft it has ever had."

Training exercises have been taking place in the US from the Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada.

Speaking from Nellis, Group Captain Stuart Atha, Station Commander of RAF Coningsby, where the planes are based, said: "What we have in Typhoon is a world-beating aircraft.

"The mantra in the RAF is, 'agile, adaptable and capable' and that is precisely what this aircraft is."

Doubts raised

The RAF has ordered 144 Typhoons, which can accelerate from standing to take-off in under seven seconds.


The aircraft were originally conceived during the 1970s

So far, nearly 140 have been built by a consortium of European firms - EADS, Alenia Aeronautica and BAE Systems - although there have been international rows over the project, with France pulling out to develop its own aircraft.

The aircraft were originally conceived during the 1970s to combat fast and sophisticated Soviet fighter jets.

Since then the enemy has changed - and with Britain's armed forces increasingly engaged in a ground-based counter-insurgency role, some critics have questioned the Typhoon's relevance to modern warfare.

Independent defence expert Paul Beaver believes that that aircraft is "much maligned".

He said: "The new equipment, such as laser-guided bombs used with satellite technology, makes the Tornado an effective ground-attack aircraft, particularly when used in conjunction with helicopters.

"And anyone who believes that we will only ever fight insurgents is wrong - there is always the risk that one day we will face a sophisticated enemy again."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7481172.stm
 

Baaheeduk

Inactive User
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
6,479
Likes
148
#2
The company I work for supplied components to EADS (Ulm) for the Tyhoon's Radar.

I've not seen one in action yet but hope to go across to Leuchars Air Show this year to catch a glimpse of one.

Two or three Typhoon squadrons will be based at Leuchars from 2010/2011 so I guess I'll see plenty of them buzzing over my house on their way to the Glens/Highlands for low aultitude training :)
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
6,926
Likes
65
#3
isnt there a naval range out ther to for fighters to practise ground attacks?

As an aside, I also read a while back that the government is purchasing a handful of F35's as well as some UAV's
 

Baaheeduk

Inactive User
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
6,479
Likes
148
#4
As an aside, I also read a while back that the government is purchasing a handful of F35's as well as some UAV's
I believe the Government will be procuring F35's for the Royal Navy. They will be based on the new carriers replacing the Sea Harrier.
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
6,926
Likes
65
#5
Yup, this matches the story I read recently. I would imagine that it will also depend on the new carriers that might be built up in Scotland also.

I am not sure if the F35C will be a VTOL like the Harrier, but it definitely has a short take off variant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F35#F-35C
 

DiamondGeezer

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Messages
3,001
Likes
78
#6
I believe the Government will be procuring F35's for the Royal Navy. They will be based on the new carriers replacing the Sea Harrier.
With the UK also funding the F35 and with BAE System's being a major partner we are for sure see a few of these in the RN
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
6,926
Likes
65
#7
the article on Wikipedia seems to suggest otherwise tony. There seems to be some relectance on the part of the US to share technology.
 

DiamondGeezer

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Messages
3,001
Likes
78
#8
the article on Wikipedia seems to suggest otherwise tony. There seems to be some relectance on the part of the US to share technology.
quote from the wiki article - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F35
The F-35 is descended from the X-35, the product of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program. Its development is being principally funded by the United States, with the United Kingdom and other partner governments providing additional funding.[4] It is being designed and built by an aerospace industry team led by Lockheed Martin with Northrop Grumman and BAE Systems as major partners.[4] Demonstrator aircraft flew in 2000,[5] with the first flight on 15 December 2006.[6]
 

Baaheeduk

Inactive User
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
6,479
Likes
148
#9
the article on Wikipedia seems to suggest otherwise tony. There seems to be some relectance on the part of the US to share technology.
Yes. If i remember correctly it was initially a race between Boeing and Lockheed to see who could come up with the best state of the art VTOL jet fighter.

EDIT: It was right under my nose....lol. Wikipedia states that the F35 (Lockheed's X35) Beat Boeing's X32 to become the new Joint Strike Fighter.

There was a program on Discovery about it. I'm sure there was no other involvement other than US at that time?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
6,926
Likes
65
#10
dont misquote:

The United Kingdom plans to acquire 138 F-35Bs[17] for the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy.[18]

The UK became increasingly frustrated by a lack of U.S. commitment to grant access to the technology that would allow the UK to maintain and upgrade its F-35s without US involvement. This is understood to relate mainly to the software for the aircraft. For five years, British officials sought an ITAR waiver to secure greater technology transfer. This request, which has the blessing of the Bush administration, was repeatedly blocked by U.S. Representative Henry Hyde, who said that the UK needed to tighten its laws protecting against the unauthorized transfer of the most advanced U.S. technology to third parties.[19]

BAE Systems CEO Mike Turner complained that the US had denied his company access to the aircraft's source code. On 21 December 2005, an article in the Glasgow Herald quoted the chairman of the House of Commons Defence Select Committee as saying "the UK might have to consider whether to continue in the programme" if no access were granted.[20] Lord Drayson, Minister for Defence Procurement, took a firmer stance during a March 2006 visit to Washington: "We do expect the software technology transfer to take place. But if it does not take place we will not be able to purchase these aircraft," and he said there was a 'Plan B' if the deal fell through.[21] This may have been the development of a navalized Typhoon.[22]

On 27 May 2006, President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair announced that "Both governments agree that the UK will have the ability to successfully operate, upgrade, employ, and maintain the Joint Strike Fighter such that the UK retains operational sovereignty over the aircraft."[23] Despite this, concerns were still expressed about the lack of technology transfer as late as December 2006. Nevertheless, on 12 December 2006, Lord Drayson signed an agreement which met the UK's demands for further participation, i.e., access to software source codes and operational sovereignty. The agreement allows "an unbroken British chain of command" for operation of the aircraft. Drayson said Britain would "not be required to have a US citizen in our own operational chain of command".[24] Drayson also said, however, that Britain is still considering an unspecified "Plan B" alternative to buying the Joint Strike Fighter.

On 25 July 2007, the Ministry of Defence confirmed that they have placed orders for the two new aircraft carriers of the Queen Elizabeth Class that will allow the purchase of the F-35B variant.[25] On May 2, 2008, however, the Washington Post reported that an Inspector General's report chided the U.S. Department of Defense's Defense Security Service for failing to ensure that BAE Systems was exercising appropriate controls over access to sensitive technologies, while both BAE and Lockheed Martin denied that any technology had been compromised.[26]
Let others read the whole article and make their own minds up.
 

DiamondGeezer

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Messages
3,001
Likes
78
#13
precisely, you needed to read the whole thing - not pick and choose.
I have read the article and I'n not picking and choosing, We will see these in the Royal Navy - that is my opinion

You like to have the last say as usual, you could have an argument in empty room
 

daveleebond

DW Member ++
Joined
Jan 31, 2007
Messages
3,456
Likes
75
#14
why did'nt we just buy raptors? would have saved a sh&t load of money considering the exchange rate.
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
6,926
Likes
65
#15
I think the F35 is slightly more advanced and/or more suited to our needs compared to the Raptor.
 

saints33

Inactive User
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
59
Likes
0
#16
I read about it earlier, I cant see what all the fuss is about. It's not that special
 

daveleebond

DW Member ++
Joined
Jan 31, 2007
Messages
3,456
Likes
75
#17
I think the F35 is slightly more advanced and/or more suited to our needs compared to the Raptor.
if the discovery channel serves me right are there not 2 versions of raptor, a VTOL and another, can't remember? whats an f35, must wikki

what about some comanche's aswell, they kick ass, are they in service yet? must also logon to Janes
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
6,926
Likes
65
#18
I dont think there is a VTOL raptor. You may be confusing that with the F35 which is a STOL.

Basically, we need to start designing and building fighters ourselves again. Get Jeremy Clarkson to design a new Spitfire or something.
 

daveleebond

DW Member ++
Joined
Jan 31, 2007
Messages
3,456
Likes
75
#19
I dont think there is a VTOL raptor. You may be confusing that with the F35 which is a STOL.

Basically, we need to start designing and building fighters ourselves again. Get Jeremy Clarkson to design a new Spitfire or something.
my bad, need to brush up on my Janes, used to be an avid reader but not done so in years. Anyway UCAV's are the future.

what happened between f22 and f35?

thought F22 was in Die Hard 4 and it showed VTOL characteristics????.
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
6,926
Likes
65
#20
nah, it definintely isnt a VTOL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F22

It may be STOL (Short Take of and Landing) though. I think the F22 and the F35 represent different classes of aircraft.

I havent watched Die Hard 4 yet, I greatly object to the marketing of the DVD box set as a "quadrilogy". I have no idea why a fake word was created when we have a perfectly good one already in the form of quartet.