Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 56 of 64 FirstFirst ... 646525354555657585960 ... LastLast
Results 1,651 to 1,680 of 1919

Thread: Eurofighter Typhoon discussion and news 2015

  1. #1651
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,029
    Quote Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
    Wyy not carry the Storm inside the stealthy FCAS bays and use the Typhoon as an escort?
    I don't know for FCAS, but afaik biggest armament launched by nEUROn as 250 kg bomb.

  2. #1652
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,281
    The FCAS is supposed to do most of its job on it's own except for the decision on the kill (or at least that is what we will be told during any development process).

  3. #1653
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,144
    Quote Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
    Wyy not carry the Storm inside the stealthy FCAS bays and use the Typhoon as an escort?
    I guess you mean as interceptor ? Because escorting a vlo striker with a non-vlo escort makes no sense at all.

  4. #1654
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    114

    Typhoon pilot interview

    The group may enjoy our interview with RAF Typhoon pilot, Roger Cruickshank.

  5. #1655
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    "Where the fruit is"
    Posts
    4,247
    Quote Originally Posted by Aurel View Post
    I guess you mean as interceptor ? Because escorting a vlo striker with a non-vlo escort makes no sense at all.
    By Escort, I did not mean close range escort, but off-range

  6. #1656
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    4,835
    How about Neuron fly in line abreast formation with Meteor deployable from positions unknown to the enemy. So Storm Shadow still deployed from Typhoon. Saves weight on Typhoon. Make an enemy think twice about being airborne when Typhoon is detected in the proximity
    Go Huskers!

  7. #1657
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,144
    I still fail to imagine a scenario where both Typhoon and a vlo theatre bomber would complement each other. It's either lightly defended airspace (some fixed SAM installations, some legacy fighters) then Typhoon will handle it with ease. (no need for a fancy stealth bomber with bomb bays large enough to carry alcm's internally)
    Or it's heavily defended airspace with mobile double digit SAMs and a notable number of modern fighters then Typhoon won't operate in said airspace until air defenses are decimated.

  8. #1658
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    4,835
    It takes a lot of mobile SAM to counter even one stealth striker. The advantage goes to the more prepared. It's much more efficient and effective to update highly mobile platforms with better technology. Numerical edges are not always enough.
    Go Huskers!

  9. #1659
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,281
    The FCAS model draws from the detailed work BAE and Dassault have done over decades to prove whether a VLO UCAV will be able to operate at will in your SAM laden environment. It's not there for a holiday, it's there to pick off the missiles so other less discrete airframes can progress.

    Increasingly, whether we are looking at the British, Spanish or Germans (I haven't read about the Italian plans), Typhoon's future is tied to a UCAV.

  10. #1660
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,111
    Quote Originally Posted by Aurel View Post
    I still fail to imagine a scenario where both Typhoon and a vlo theatre bomber would complement each other. It's either lightly defended airspace (some fixed SAM installations, some legacy fighters) then Typhoon will handle it with ease. (no need for a fancy stealth bomber with bomb bays large enough to carry alcm's internally)
    Or it's heavily defended airspace with mobile double digit SAMs and a notable number of modern fighters then Typhoon won't operate in said airspace until air defenses are decimated.
    The VLO platforms would open a corridor for the non VLO.

  11. #1661
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,144
    Quote Originally Posted by TomcatViP View Post
    Wyy not carry the Storm inside the stealthy FCAS bays and use the Typhoon as an escort?
    That was my starting point. If you have a VLO platform able to deliver storm shadow there is no point of Typhoon involvement. If the FCAS is smaller (as I would expect) then yes, doing old fashioned SEAD/DEAD missions to open a corridor are back on the menu. But this kinda defeats the purpose of having a stealth platform.
    The whole cost/benefit equation for developing, fielding and maintaining VLO assets was the promise to just avoid enemy air defenses instead of the time and money consuming process of suppression and destruction of enemy air defenses.

  12. #1662
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    949
    I've got a question concerning German Eurofighters.

    Have any of them (if so, how many?) finally been integrated with and cleared to use guided air to ground weapons? For some time luftwaffe's website says "future gbu-48" for their Eurofighters... has nothing changed in that regards? Any other weapons integrated?
    Binkov's Battlegrounds - military analysis videos

    New video available! Russia vs USA: Nuclear war

  13. #1663
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,433
    Short answer no.

  14. #1664
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by totoro View Post
    Have any of them (if so, how many?) finally been integrated with and cleared to use guided air to ground weapons? For some time luftwaffe's website says "future gbu-48" for their Eurofighters... has nothing changed in that regards? Any other weapons integrated?
    I wish Air Forces Monthly and Combat Aircraft were searchable. There was an article on German Eurofighters during the last year that said Germany will install the latest software versions for tranche 2 and 3 aircraft. Why not? This is, however, not the same as training to use these weapons. As long as Germany has a low defense budget and keeps the Tornado on the front line, I cannot see them spending much money on ground attack training for Typhoon pilots.

  15. #1665
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,433
    Quote Originally Posted by mil View Post
    I wish Air Forces Monthly and Combat Aircraft were searchable. There was an article on German Eurofighters during the last year that said Germany will install the latest software versions for tranche 2 and 3 aircraft. Why not? This is, however, not the same as training to use these weapons. As long as Germany has a low defense budget and keeps the Tornado on the front line, I cannot see them spending much money on ground attack training for Typhoon pilots.
    The GAF has a fix requirement for A/S capability for the TLG 31's NRF assignment from 1st January 2018 onwards. By then the unit must be operational in the A/S role which includes the German variant of the GBU-48 (different fuze opposed to the "standard" model). However integration is only planned for P1Eb FW which is still some months away from being cleared by GAF. Integration under a national clearance is underway. If everything goes well actual live trials can start in Q3.

  16. #1666
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,093
    Vienna (AFP) - Austria's defence ministry will sue European giant Airbus over alleged corruption and bribery linked to a controversial $2 billion sale of Eurofighter jets, an official said Thursday.

    The country's largest-ever defence deal has been plagued by scandals from the very start.

    "We will file a lawsuit against Airbus," defence ministry spokesman Michael Bauer told AFP.

    He said the findings of a government investigation into the 2003 deal worth around 2 billion euros ($2.1 billion) will be presented later on Thursday morning.
    Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/news/austria-s...071214555.html

  17. #1667
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,577
    Why does not SAAB sue BAE Systems, too. BAE was involved in marketing Gripen at the time but surprise, surprise Typhoon got the deal even though Gripen would have been a much better choice for Austria.
    Sum ergo cogito

  18. #1668
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    3,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Spitfire9 View Post
    Why does not SAAB sue BAE Systems, too. BAE was involved in marketing Gripen at the time but surprise, surprise Typhoon got the deal even though Gripen would have been a much better choice for Austria.
    Because BAE also bribed for a saab sales in Africa?

  19. #1669
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    946
    Quote Originally Posted by Aurel View Post
    I still fail to imagine a scenario where both Typhoon and a vlo theatre bomber
    If the VLO asset is a UCAV then politically and operationally it might very well be preferable to have an inhabited aircraft in the same area

    There is also the fact that by emitting the VLO asset becomes less VLO. LPI is not NPI.
    Rule zero: don't be on fire

  20. #1670
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Spitfire9 View Post
    Why does not SAAB sue BAE Systems, too. BAE was involved in marketing Gripen at the time but surprise, surprise Typhoon got the deal even though Gripen would have been a much better choice for Austria.
    perhaps BAE had more money to make by selling EF than gripen and therefore priced gripen so high as to
    send the austrians to EF

  21. #1671
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    127
    Quote Originally Posted by obligatory View Post
    perhaps BAE had more money to make by selling EF than gripen and therefore priced gripen so high as to
    send the austrians to EF

    I would argue that Saab was a bit overconfident in Austria. They should have offered a more competitive deal and promoted it better than they did.

  22. #1672
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    676
    Name:  red.jpg
Views: 899
Size:  122.0 KB

    Both 11th and 14th Wings at the Red Flag right now.

  23. #1673
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,093
    He could even imagine the decommissioning of the 15 Eurofighters, if a more cost-effective solution for the airspace monitoring could be found. With this announcement, Defense Minister Hanspeter Doskozil (SP) has recently been struck by the National Council, where the second Eurofighter committee is being formed.

    From today on, a separate "Special Commission" will examine whether there are "economic and military alternatives to the Eurofighter system". Under the leadership of the commander of the air forces, Karl Gruber, 27 experts also make comparisons with foreign systems. Until 27 June, a final report and thus facts will be created, Michael Bauer, spokesman for the Ministry of Defense and even a member of the SoKo, announced in conversation with the OOne news.

    Already, in view of the enormous operating costs (see box) and the clear task of being "almost compelling to find alternatives", Bauers forecast. In the course of the 2002 type selection, the Swedish Saab Gripen was in any case classified as much cheaper for purchase and operation.

    Delivered between 2007 and 2009, the 15 Eurofighters have so far caused the Bundesheer some 500 million euros in operating and maintenance costs. Currently, 80 million euros are spent annually. For a remaining lifetime of 20 years, a further 1.6 billion euros should be incurred (not secured by value). The purchase price in 2007 was 1.67 billion euros.

    The fact that the Austrian jets are used Eurofighter of Tranche 1, according to BH spokesman Michael Bauer, is partly costly. Spare parts, that is, a motor, gearbox, hardware, can be taken over from the production of the modern tranche 2, but they have to be partly reprocessed. Wear parts (seals, bolts, screws ...) one can use one-to-one.

    Among the costs listed in the purchase contract "not in clarity" are those for "engine modifications" in the army. These have been necessary with every Eurofighter since 2016 and until 2018, and costs € 11.7 million annually.

    The service contract with Airbus (47.2 million euros) deviated by far the largest share of the operating costs (2016 in total 71 million euros). In addition to engine renewals, these included spare parts (€ 5 million), fuel (€ 4.6 million) and other items (€ 2.5 million).
    Google translated from: http://www.nachrichten.at/nachrichte...art385,2518816

    I wonder how much Hungary and the Czech Republic are paying to operate their Gripens...

    Austria could become a highly likely customer for Gripen E when their Typhoons become too expensive to maintain (IMHO).

  24. #1674
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Eastern Switzerland
    Posts
    1,998
    Quote Originally Posted by Loke View Post
    Google translated from: http://www.nachrichten.at/nachrichte...art385,2518816

    I wonder how much Hungary and the Czech Republic are paying to operate their Gripens...

    Austria could become a highly likely customer for Gripen E when their Typhoons become too expensive to maintain (IMHO).
    According to this: http://bbj.hu/politics/sweden-approv...---paper_62472
    Around HUF 30bn which is 97 million € in todays money. For a lease of course.
    Anyhow, if they decide to end Typhoon operations, it would be an entirely political decision, actual cost don't matter. No one cares if in the end the new solution would be more expensive.

    Again for political reasons the new solutions would almost certainly be Gripen based. As the Hungarian example shows, leasing would probably not be cheaper, unless they could sell the EFs for a reasonable price. Reasonable enough to also cover the new infrastructure. Doubtful.
    Buying would depend on the model. I'd say new E models are out of the question, too expensive. It would be either used C or even A models. Whatever is cheapest but offers the minimum of capabilites required.
    How can less be more? It's impossible. More is more.
    Yngwie Malmsteen

  25. #1675
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,880
    sell their Typhoons to who?

    none of the nations building and operating them will be interested in buying more as they try already to reduce their orders. What's more, they are T1 aircraft that would need serious upgrade to be brought on par with what they use now. and what country will be interested in fighters that cost an arm to operate? Looks to me they're stuck with their typhoons for the time being.

  26. #1676
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,043
    given the very modest difference in purchase & operational cost between gripen C and E,
    i for one can not justify opting for C.
    since their EF cant be sold, there must be a reason i'm not aware of to fork up the dough
    for another fighter until their T1 is worn out
    Last edited by obligatory; 24th March 2017 at 09:42.

  27. #1677
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,381
    Quote Originally Posted by TooCool_12f View Post
    sell their Typhoons to who?

    none of the nations building and operating them will be interested in buying more as they try already to reduce their orders. What's more, they are T1 aircraft that would need serious upgrade to be brought on par with what they use now. and what country will be interested in fighters that cost an arm to operate? Looks to me they're stuck with their typhoons for the time being.
    No one that operates the Typhoon is "trying" to reduce their orders. Severall years ago, the four original partners have decided to forego tranche T3B, but that was in 2009. The only second hand Phoon offer on the market today, is a handfull (around 12 airframes) of Italian T1´s.
    Last edited by Sintra; 24th March 2017 at 10:57.

  28. #1678
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,531
    Quote Originally Posted by Sintra View Post
    No one that operates the Typhoon is "trying" to reduce their orders. Severall years ago, the four original partners have decided to forego tranche T3B, but that was in 2009. The only second hand Phoon offer on the market today, is a handfull (around 12 airframes) of Italian T1´s.
    Spanish T1s are available for sale as well. There were marketing them to Peru in 2013 IIRC.

  29. #1679
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,880
    Quote Originally Posted by Sintra View Post
    No one that operates the Typhoon is "trying" to reduce their orders. Severall years ago, the four original partners have decided to forego tranche T3B, but that was in 2009. The only second hand Phoon offer on the market today, is a handfull (around 12 airframes) of Italian T1´s.
    They aren't "trying to reduce their orders", they simoly stopped ordering eventjose they were supposed to order in the first place. In any case, none will buy used T1 Typhoons, and a nation who'd start by buying a dozen of used Typhoons would have to invest a lot in maintenance, for such a small number of airframes

  30. #1680
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,531
    Quote Originally Posted by TooCool_12f View Post
    They aren't "trying to reduce their orders", they simoly stopped ordering eventjose they were supposed to order in the first place.
    Come now, lets not exaggerate here.

    They were 'supposed to order' 620 aircraft while they actually ordered 487 (incl. T1s later sold to Austria), that's 78.5% of the original target.

    Just to put that in context, France planned to order 287 Rafales but will order no more than 225, 78.3% of the original target.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES