Sale of Typhoon to India
Discussion
911newbie said:
FourWheelDrift said:
Rafale M version, naval version for their new carriers which the Typhoon isn't.
Is this a photoshop ?
source - http://www.defencetalk.com/india-to-choose-supplie...
That would be if it wasn't for the fact that the decision and competition is between the non-navalized Rafale and the Eurofighter!
Eric Mc said:
Straight from factory to museum. Cut out the middle man - must save a fortune.
Well the way our Military spending budgets going the other alternative would be to give them to the yanks and probably pay them for the privilege of keeping them.Oh yes I forgot we are already doing that aren't we to swap from the B model to the C!
I believe the current deal is we are going to swap our 3 off F-35B prototypes that haven't even been built yet for 2 off F-35C prototypes that also have yet to be built.
And although the B variant is hugely more expensive than the C and we are giving them 3 for the price of 2, we are also paying them XX millions on top for the inconvenience.
We should have just bought Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets and built them under license at Warton at half the price.
At least then we'd actually have something to fly off this Carrier when it's delivered!
Can then replace them 20 years down the line when the F-35 actually works and the development costs have long since been written off.
Tango13 said:
Eric Mc said:
Straight from factory to museum. Cut out the middle man - must save a fortune.
The USAF did exactly this with some of their F-16s, delivered direct from the factory to Davis Monthan AFB to be wrapped in spraylat.Eric Mc said:
Ther Indians already use the Jaguar (part French) and various Mirage variants (100% French) and all made by Dassault.
What do you think?
I don't think it will be clear cut by any stretch. Anyone that says they weren't surprised by the earlier down-select decision is clearly fibbing... Typhoon is a great platform, and compared with the Rafale has a very good export record. What do you think?
How many have the French sold again..?
The Indians also use the Hawk, and given that this aircraft is the trainer of choice for Typhoon creates a good position for BAE Systems and UK manufacturing in general.
Of course, I'm a little bias sitting 30 yards from Typhoon final production. But then, when you see these things carving up sky on a daily basis, you do get quite passionate about them.
Roberty said:
911newbie said:
Is the F-35 really 5th gen ?
Will we ever get any ?
Yes and yes.Will we ever get any ?
We are signed up to own 3 off prototypes so I'd guess we'll get those to spread around a couple of UK aircraft museums at some point!
PaulG40 said:
Roberty said:
911newbie said:
Is the F-35 really 5th gen ?
Will we ever get any ?
Yes and yes.Will we ever get any ?
We are signed up to own 3 off prototypes so I'd guess we'll get those to spread around a couple of UK aircraft museums at some point!
I've heard the Typhoon being refered to as 4.5 gen aircraft as it has a degree of stealth but wasn't designed with stealth as a priorty like the F-22 and F-35.
Eric Mc said:
Ther Indians already use the Jaguar (part French) and various Mirage variants (100% French) and all made by Dassault.
What do you think?
What do you think?
The Indians already use Jaguar (Part BAE),Harrier (they build and assemble it themselves), and BAE have invested a huge amount in developing a manufacturing capabaility in India with HAL, where they are building Hawks for the Indian Airforce...
Who do you think will win ???
Bear in mind that the technical capability of the aircraft is often less a selling point compared to the amount of Economic Offset included in the deal...
Roberty said:
Agreed, so the F-35 lightning II is indeed 5th gen as stated.
I've heard the Typhoon being refered to as 4.5 gen aircraft as it has a degree of stealth but wasn't designed with stealth as a priorty like the F-22 and F-35.
Personally I am not so sold on the idea of stealth as the defence industry are. My reasoning is that advances in Radar technology are in my view likely to negate the current stealth technologies within the 25-30 year service lives of these 5th Gen stealthy aircraft. Once your 5th Gen is visible on somebodies new fangled super radar, then all those performance compromises you made to make it stealthy come sharply into focus do they not?I've heard the Typhoon being refered to as 4.5 gen aircraft as it has a degree of stealth but wasn't designed with stealth as a priorty like the F-22 and F-35.
Looking forward, surely the limiting factor would be the range and accuracy of the missiles carried on the aircraft?
If an aircraft is not stealthy, but has radar and missiles that can see and shoot down even the stealthiest of enemies from a range of(say) 100 miles, then the stealthy aircrafts advantage is lost unless he can see and shootdown his enemy from 101 miles of further? Forget the actual mileage numbers for a second and consider the principle, whether your plane is visible as a Tennis ball or a London bus is irrelevant if both sides can see each other within the kill zone of both aircraft.
If stealth, short of a full Klingon cloaking device is gone as a game changer, then Missile range and the ability to counter missiles in some way, or even dodge them (ie, manouvreability) are the real deciders. And if you can dodge them then its back to good old dog fighting, given the sorts of closing speeds involved with modern fighter aircraft... which is where I thought the Typhoon was king?? Shall I just get my coat now?
andymadmak said:
Looking forward, surely the limiting factor would be the range and accuracy of the missiles carried on the aircraft?
If an aircraft is not stealthy, but has radar and missiles that can see and shoot down even the stealthiest of enemies from a range of(say) 100 miles
F-14s with Phoenix missles all round then?If an aircraft is not stealthy, but has radar and missiles that can see and shoot down even the stealthiest of enemies from a range of(say) 100 miles
andymadmak said:
Personally I am not so sold on the idea of stealth as the defence industry are. My reasoning is that advances in Radar technology are in my view likely to negate the current stealth technologies within the 25-30 year service lives of these 5th Gen stealthy aircraft. Once your 5th Gen is visible on somebodies new fangled super radar, then all those performance compromises you made to make it stealthy come sharply into focus do they not?
Not wanting to burst your bubble - but you forget radar clutter. If your aircraft has the same cross section as the surrounding clutter it poses problems. Birds can get up to 5000ft for instance regularly - I see them at this height sometimes at work - and lots of seagulls up to 1500ft. The F117 had a comparable X section that was even smaller. Are you going to scramble to intercept some seagulls in case they're a 5th gen fighter? It'll have to be a different technology, unrelated to radar.andymadmak said:
Looking forward, surely the limiting factor would be the range and accuracy of the missiles carried on the aircraft?
If an aircraft is not stealthy, but has radar and missiles that can see and shoot down even the stealthiest of enemies from a range of(say) 100 miles, then the stealthy aircrafts advantage is lost unless he can see and shootdown his enemy from 101 miles of further? Forget the actual mileage numbers for a second and consider the principle, whether your plane is visible as a Tennis ball or a London bus is irrelevant if both sides can see each other within the kill zone of both aircraft.
But of you can see him at 200 miles, and he can't see you until 100 miles, then that puts you in a great tactical position, especially if you aren't doing A2A (and ultimately the F35 is going to be used as a bomb truck most of the time). And with a BVR missile system, the guys who is already pointing at the other guy at the time when they get inside that hypothetical 100 mile radius has got a big advantage as his missile is already travelling in the right direction If an aircraft is not stealthy, but has radar and missiles that can see and shoot down even the stealthiest of enemies from a range of(say) 100 miles, then the stealthy aircrafts advantage is lost unless he can see and shootdown his enemy from 101 miles of further? Forget the actual mileage numbers for a second and consider the principle, whether your plane is visible as a Tennis ball or a London bus is irrelevant if both sides can see each other within the kill zone of both aircraft.
I would sincerely hope that if the Typhoone deal doesn't come off that aid figure will drop to zero.
£1Bn is a shed load of job creation / hospitals / schools / take-yer-pick in the UK.
I just don't understand why we're giving bribes to India ?
(Nobody really pretends its aid anymore now anyway.) Since it's a bribe - what has it got us ?
India has a space programme, we don't.
Their economy is usually listed at 8th and ours at 6th in the GDP rankings.
They are teh tenth biggest recipient of aid.
Why did the Tory government decide to protect international aid like they have, especially bribes ?
£1Bn is a shed load of job creation / hospitals / schools / take-yer-pick in the UK.
I just don't understand why we're giving bribes to India ?
(Nobody really pretends its aid anymore now anyway.) Since it's a bribe - what has it got us ?
India has a space programme, we don't.
Their economy is usually listed at 8th and ours at 6th in the GDP rankings.
They are teh tenth biggest recipient of aid.
Why did the Tory government decide to protect international aid like they have, especially bribes ?
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff