EuroFighter Tycoon

[Jonny671]

Thanks, Dave. Good post.

Quick question; if we are using these fast jets in Afganistan/Iraq have they actually got any competition? Surely the Afgan random RPG is nothing to one of these, Correct? So it's doing a Air-to-Ground Job out there?

[Mr Dave]

Jonny671 said:

Thanks, Dave. Good post.

Quick question; if we are using these fast jets in Afganistan/Iraq have they actually got any competition? Surely the Afgan random RPG is nothing to one of these, Correct? So it's doing a Air-to-Ground Job out there?

Tornado GR4s are out there at the minute, as are Dutch F-16s, a lot of American stuff and I believe the French and Germans. There are a few MANPADs about (Stinger,redeye,blowpipe, russian chinese and possibly other surface to air missiles) but there is no competition.

The advantage of using a fast jet in Afghanistan is that it can take off and loiter on station awaiting a call for support, gets the call and can reach the troops on the ground in minutes. First thing is if needed they can do a show of force, which to Terry a Tornado screaming along at 700 odd mile an hour at 100feet does make an impression and will often cause them to make a tactical decision of sod this for a game of soldiers. Then if needed they can deploy their ordanance.

Depending on what happens next they can stay in the area or if need be they can return to height to a tanker aircraft, refuel and return to where they are needed very quickly, or if that has sorted it they can pitch up somewhere else very quickly.

Afghanistan(and Iraq but we arent there anymore) is pretty vast and the ability to cover ground very very quickly is the beauty of fast jets, the ability to carry a lot of ordanance, be refuelled mid air and provide shows of force are invaluable to the squaddies on the ground. If things are going pretty badly on the ground, two Tornados or Harriers or what have you screaming overhead I would imagine would be very morale raising as well.

Hope that helps.

[Jonny671]

Mr Dave said:

Jonny671 said:

Thanks, Dave. Good post.

Quick question; if we are using these fast jets in Afganistan/Iraq have they actually got any competition? Surely the Afgan random RPG is nothing to one of these, Correct? So it's doing a Air-to-Ground Job out there?

Tornado GR4s are out there at the minute, as are Dutch F-16s, a lot of American stuff and I believe the French and Germans. There are a few MANPADs about (Stinger,redeye,blowpipe, russian chinese and possibly other surface to air missiles) but there is no competition.

The advantage of using a fast jet in Afghanistan is that it can take off and loiter on station awaiting a call for support, gets the call and can reach the troops on the ground in minutes. First thing is if needed they can do a show of force, which to Terry a Tornado screaming along at 700 odd mile an hour at 100feet does make an impression and will often cause them to make a tactical decision of sod this for a game of soldiers. Then if needed they can deploy their ordanance.

Depending on what happens next they can stay in the area or if need be they can return to height to a tanker aircraft, refuel and return to where they are needed very quickly, or if that has sorted it they can pitch up somewhere else very quickly.

Afghanistan(and Iraq but we arent there anymore) is pretty vast and the ability to cover ground very very quickly is the beauty of fast jets, the ability to carry a lot of ordanance, be refuelled mid air and provide shows of force are invaluable to the squaddies on the ground. If things are going pretty badly on the ground, two Tornados or Harriers or what have you screaming overhead I would imagine would be very morale raising as well.

Hope that helps.

Excellent! Thanks.

Understood, I didn't know they done the loiter thing in the sky, though it would make sense and as you say, I'd imagine some friendly fast jets overhead would be very welcome.

Do we/US have AC130's out there too, I'd imagine they'd be a nice sight too.

[Mojocvh]

Bedazzled said:

The Eurofighter seems like a bit of a white elephant to me, I can't really understand what opponent it was designed to fight even in the cold war, most of the Russian fighters are much bigger and faster and turning ability isn't that important, not since 1940 anyhow. Most WWII pilots got shot down being 'bounced' by an enemy who they didn't even know was there, seeing your opponent before they saw you and having an energy advantage (speed or height) was what mattered. Having said that it's an impressive piece of kit and having a few of them to defend the Falkland Islands and protect our troops abroad is no bad thing.

F35 will have an exquisite SA sensor suite (so Lockheed Martin say), my point is that it will be a step backwards in real life performance terms, the F22 can maneuver and run bravely away very well, thus surviving to re engage.
There is also an alarming trend amoungst certain American pundits to decry the soviet a, sorry, russian attempt to produce a 5th gen LO aircraft.

Well they are FOOLS to do that.

[Mojocvh]

Ayahuasca said:

Eric Mc said:

Because EVERY advantage is worth having. I am sure the Typhoon is optomised for a BVR engagement - but any fighter pilot worth his salt will value having an agile fighter under him as well as fast one. Ask all those chaps who fly F-16s, F-15s and MiG 29s - and ask those pilots who are gladly giving up their Tornado F3s.

Also, ask those American pilots who rode into Vietnamese skies in their missile toting, non-agile Phantoms thinking they were going to have it all their opwn way.

The F3 pilots don't all get Typhoons. My Bro in law went from F3 to Hawk!

Some of them may be looking a even less than that!!

FYI Eric. http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/81573-torna...

"The Jane's Defence Upgrades non-subscriber digest at

http://www.janes.com/aerospace/milit...0210_1_n.sh...

says:

"RAF modifies Tornado F.3 for SEAD role

By Jack C Nicholas

The UK Royal Air Force (RAF) is understood to be modifying a number of its Panavia Tornado F.3 air-defence fighters to allow them to carry the MBDA ALARM (Air-Launched Anti-Radar Missile) and assume the Suppression of Enemy Air Defences (SEAD) or 'Wild Weasel' role.

One lesson from the air war over Kosovo in 1999 was that Europe lacked sufficient SEAD capability. Germany and Italy had a handful of Tornado ECR (Electronic Combat and Reconnaissance) aircraft equipped with AGM-88 HARMs (High-speed Anti-Radar Missiles), while the RAF had two Tornado GR.1 'Pathfinder' squadrons armed with ALARM missiles but with no real autonomous ability to detect and locate enemy emitters. The ALARM missile proved extremely effective in combat in the Persian Gulf 1990-91 and in the Balkans, but the Tornado GR.1/4 was unable to exploit its full potential, especially as a direct-fire weapon.

The key to the SEAD role is an Emitter Locator System (ELS). With its well-distributed tail- and wing-glove-mounted Radar Homing And Warning System antennas, it was clear that the Tornado F.3 could be given an extremely accurate ELS capability relatively simply.

Development of such a system is understood to have reached an advanced stage under an Urgent Operational Requirement (UOR) issued in 1999 (see JDU Vol IV No.6 pp7-8), before the programme was cancelled as a cost-saving measure.

JDU has now learned that the Tornado F.3 SEAD programme has been resurrected, triggered by the continuing crisis in the Middle East. Under a new UOR, an unspecified number of Tornado F.3s are being upgraded as dual-role air-defence fighter/defence suppression aircraft, ready for deployment to the Persian Gulf if required.

The programme will transform the Tornado F.3 - long sidelined by its narrow usefulness in the shrinking air-defence role - into what may arguably be the RAF's most important 'fast jet' combat aircraft."

[Mr Dave]

Mojocvh said:

Ayahuasca said:

Eric Mc said:

Because EVERY advantage is worth having. I am sure the Typhoon is optomised for a BVR engagement - but any fighter pilot worth his salt will value having an agile fighter under him as well as fast one. Ask all those chaps who fly F-16s, F-15s and MiG 29s - and ask those pilots who are gladly giving up their Tornado F3s.

Also, ask those American pilots who rode into Vietnamese skies in their missile toting, non-agile Phantoms thinking they were going to have it all their opwn way.

The F3 pilots don't all get Typhoons. My Bro in law went from F3 to Hawk!

Some of them may be looking a even less than that!!

FYI Eric. http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/81573-torna...

"The Jane's Defence Upgrades non-subscriber digest at

http://www.janes.com/aerospace/milit...0210_1_n.sh...

says:

"RAF modifies Tornado F.3 for SEAD role

By Jack C Nicholas

The UK Royal Air Force (RAF) is understood to be modifying a number of its Panavia Tornado F.3 air-defence fighters to allow them to carry the MBDA ALARM (Air-Launched Anti-Radar Missile) and assume the Suppression of Enemy Air Defences (SEAD) or 'Wild Weasel' role.

One lesson from the air war over Kosovo in 1999 was that Europe lacked sufficient SEAD capability. Germany and Italy had a handful of Tornado ECR (Electronic Combat and Reconnaissance) aircraft equipped with AGM-88 HARMs (High-speed Anti-Radar Missiles), while the RAF had two Tornado GR.1 'Pathfinder' squadrons armed with ALARM missiles but with no real autonomous ability to detect and locate enemy emitters. The ALARM missile proved extremely effective in combat in the Persian Gulf 1990-91 and in the Balkans, but the Tornado GR.1/4 was unable to exploit its full potential, especially as a direct-fire weapon.

The key to the SEAD role is an Emitter Locator System (ELS). With its well-distributed tail- and wing-glove-mounted Radar Homing And Warning System antennas, it was clear that the Tornado F.3 could be given an extremely accurate ELS capability relatively simply.

Development of such a system is understood to have reached an advanced stage under an Urgent Operational Requirement (UOR) issued in 1999 (see JDU Vol IV No.6 pp7-8), before the programme was cancelled as a cost-saving measure.

JDU has now learned that the Tornado F.3 SEAD programme has been resurrected, triggered by the continuing crisis in the Middle East. Under a new UOR, an unspecified number of Tornado F.3s are being upgraded as dual-role air-defence fighter/defence suppression aircraft, ready for deployment to the Persian Gulf if required.

The programme will transform the Tornado F.3 - long sidelined by its narrow usefulness in the shrinking air-defence role - into what may arguably be the RAF's most important 'fast jet' combat aircraft."

ALL the F.3s will be gone soon. Too many problems keeping them flying. Although the lack of SEAD until F-35 arrives will be just another capability "holiday" I suppose. One that wont get fixed as we will get away without it for a few years.

[Traveller]

Mojocvh said:

F35 will have an exquisite SA sensor suite (so Lockheed Martin say), my point is that it will be a step backwards in real life performance terms, the F22 can maneuver and run bravely away very well, thus surviving to re engage.
There is also an alarming trend amoungst certain American pundits to decry the soviet a, sorry, russian attempt to produce a 5th gen LO aircraft.

Well they are FOOLS to do that.

Russians have already flown a LO aircraft, this year the Mig PakFA.



I would not like to be a typhoon pilot facing that off at either long or short range. The Chinese are also making huge leaps in aircraft design and manufacture, especially with SU-27, SU-33, SU-35 derivatives like the Russians, which as much as western nations deride it, is an excellent platform and with the potential AESA and current PESA radar systems, helmet mounted sights, Archer A-11, Vympel R-77, good loiter, payload, speed and agility with thrust vectoring. It is not an opponent that a typhoon can easily dominant. F22 yes, F35 maybe at BVR, due to low observability, not close in, but the Typhoon will have a difficult fight on it's hands at any range.

Edited by Traveller on Saturday 17th July 22:08

[Ginetta G15 Girl]

Mojocvh said:

but the Tornado GR.1/4 was unable to exploit its full potential, especially as a direct-fire weapon.

ALARM never was a 'direct fire weapon' so that author is talking out of his rear end! ALARM differs substantially from HARM (which is a direct fire weapon) in that it is launched into a virtual 'basket' where it loiters before identifying an EW threat and directing itself in.

[Mr Dave]

F-22 is LO but not truely stealthy like the B-2, and from certain aspects will be easier to find on a powerful radar than you would expect, not relevant to older or not very powerful radars which wont be able to find it but modern AESA radars, AWACs and the radars shipping with the newest S300 SAMs would have a reasonable probability of picking it up. You also cannot hide the trail of heat coming out the back of those very impressive donks on the F-22, aircraft with a good IR sensor suite could perhaps detect it from that....

Anyway the T-50 isnt very stealthy from the rear due to the 3d thrust vectoring so the Typhoon with Meteor supported by the E-3Ds should a fighting chance.

From what I have been told the Typhoons sensor suite as well as DASS fit are supposed to be very good, better than the BAE stuff in the F-22 anyway.

Its all academic really.

[Mojocvh]

Nimrod MR4A cancelled????

http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jdw/jdw100716_1_...

Gents the st has just hit the proverbial!!

[Mojocvh]

Ginetta G15 Girl said:

Mojocvh said:

but the Tornado GR.1/4 was unable to exploit its full potential, especially as a direct-fire weapon.

ALARM never was a 'direct fire weapon' so that author is talking out of his rear end! ALARM differs substantially from HARM (which is a direct fire weapon) in that it is launched into a virtual 'basket' where it loiters before identifying an EW threat and directing itself in.

Hmmmm http://typhoon.starstreak.net/common/AG/alarm.html

Anyway it doesn't really matter.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-1295382/A...

Edited by Mojocvh on Saturday 17th July 23:29

[Mr Dave]

Mojocvh said:

Nimrod MR4A cancelled????

http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jdw/jdw100716_1_...

Gents the st has just hit the proverbial!!

Sure they are going to spend close to 400million to close Lyneham and relocate the Hercules fleet to Brize where there is really not enough space for them and A-400m.

Reducing 3 runways for the air transport fleet to 1. Lyneham usually has better weather than Brize due to the height and fog being an issue at Brize.

To save possibly 25 million a year before the costs of the move are taken into account.

When the Herc landed wheels up a while back at Brize it blacked the runway for a good long while. Without Brize being open with the aircraft there we cannot launch the tanker for the QRAs....

[FourWheelDrift]

Eric Mc said:

What should the RAf use for air defence?

Are you implyiong that UK airspace doesn't need to be defended.

The Typhoon has some impressive BVR capability.

And the "old enemy" hasn't exactly gone away either.

Times don't change much. Not for them anyway

[MudasarKhan]

Some good information on here.

The reason for asking was I read about the PakFa and thought what do we have. Didnt know that we would be getting the F-35, but now I do.

So our future really lies in the Eurofighter and the F-35. In my opinion as good as it gets for us really.

I dont have too much confidence in the Eurozone, so thats why I was asking on the future side of things. Anyway, thanks for the info lads.

[The real Apache]

Mr Dave said:

pretty much as good as the Tornado (which are all falling to bits as it happens).

Really?, could you explain?

[Tango13]

Mr Dave said:

Mojocvh said:

Nimrod MR4A cancelled????

http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jdw/jdw100716_1_...

Gents the st has just hit the proverbial!!

Sure they are going to spend close to 400million to close Lyneham and relocate the Hercules fleet to Brize where there is really not enough space for them and A-400m.

Reducing 3 runways for the air transport fleet to 1. Lyneham usually has better weather than Brize due to the height and fog being an issue at Brize.

To save possibly 25 million a year before the costs of the move are taken into account.

When the Herc landed wheels up a while back at Brize it blacked the runway for a good long while. Without Brize being open with the aircraft there we cannot launch the tanker for the QRAs....

So let's get this right, we are going to spend £400m to achieve 1/3 the heavy lift capability ;re runways?

Am I correct in saying that the Black buck raids were partialy to stop Argentine heavy lift capability?

I doubt any potential foe could take out a runway but why take the chance? Yes we could disperse the heavy lift fleet but why take the chance when a bad parking day is enough to screw things up in peace time?

[anonymous-user]

Mojocvh said:

Nimrod MR4A cancelled????

http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jdw/jdw100716_1_...

Gents the st has just hit the proverbial!!

Not sure where their sources are for this, but to cancel at this time would seem a bit mad to say the least.
I believe the aircraft have been paid for, the first two production aircraft are flying, due to be joined by a third very shortly, the rest are in build. I also believe crew training simulators etc are in place, so to can it on the verge of going into service would seem madness, as there is currently a huge capability gap. At least one has been handed over to the RAF already.

The only option is to buy something like the P8 but the cost of buying a batch of those (which are not in service as yet) would cost more than the £200 million saving that is in that article.

Considering saving British jobs, getting the money back into our economy, providing a capable platform as soon as possible and not costing any more money, I would see to continue with the Nimrod project to be the only option. It's not like the AEW3 which didn't work.
Mind you the MRA4 didn't appear at Waddington airshow (it was booked for a fly through) the other week and was due on static at RIAT, but didn't show there either.

[Dr Jekyll]

The way it reads to me most of the cost of the MR has already been spent, the saving would simply be in operating costs compared with doing without the capability altogether. So buying an alternative would be worst of both worlds.

[Bosshogg76]

The real Apache said:

Mr Dave said:

pretty much as good as the Tornado (which are all falling to bits as it happens).

Really?, could you explain?

I'd be quite interested as well, Tornado F3's have been consistently semi reliable over the 12year period I've worked on them. including an unprecedented 100% serviceability rate during Op Telic. The current serviceability levels are more down to the lack of spares (contracts terminated etc) and a lack of man power in both the shed and on Tremblers. However taking all this into account Tremblers are still the only SQN in the RAF to be hitting the required flying hours.

anonymous said:

[redacted]

One jet was delivered to the SQN, promptly went state on it's first flight and sent back to Warton for them to try again.

Edited by Bosshogg76 on Sunday 18th July 20:19

[aeropilot]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

From what I understand the first crew conversion course commences tomorrow (Mon 19th)