More Argie Bargie
Discussion
Hooli said:
You mean something as stupid as ordering them without any guns fitted?
Agreed, if I was a Typhoon jock a cannon would provide some contingency and reassurance.If the engagement looks like going WVR then either bug out or put your faith in the ASRAAM.
What other choice would the jock have ?
Edited by Dr Banjo on Friday 20th April 11:00
Dr Banjo said:
Hooli said:
You mean something as stupid as ordering them without any guns fitted?
Agreed, if I was a Typhoon jock a cannon would provide some contingency and reassurance.If the engagement looks like going WVR then either bug out or put your faith in the ASRAAM.
What other choice would the jock have ?
Edited by Dr Banjo on Friday 20th April 11:00
) Here is some evidence from the Telegraph
2006 Telegraph article said:
12:01AM BST 03 Oct 2006
The RAF has been forced into an embarrassing U-turn on its policy of not allowing pilots of the new Eurofighter Typhoon to fire their gun.
The service has decided to issue ammunition to future Typhoon squadrons and train pilots in using the fighter's single German-made 27mm Mauser cannon, reversing its cost-cutting edict.
The decision follows experience in Afghanistan showing that guns are still one of the most effective weapons when supporting ground troops.
In a scathing e-mail, a Parachute Regiment major commanding an isolated outpost described air support from RAF Harriers, which have no guns and rely on rockets, as "utterly, utterly useless".
He contrasted their performance with the support offered by US air force A10 aircraft, which are equipped with a 27mm rotary cannon.
At a conference last week, Air Vice-Marshal David Walker, the officer commanding No 1 Group, which includes the Harrier and the newly-forming Typhoon squadrons, said he had decided to proceed with the Typhoon gun, buying ammunition, spares and maintenance equipment.
Seven years ago, the ministry decided to dispense with the gun on all but the first 55 of the 232 Typhoons planned for RAF service, in contrast to the other nations in the Eurofighter consortium, which kept it on all ordered aircraft.
The experts argued that Typhoon did not need anything as crude as a gun. The plan would have saved the taxpayer about £90 million.
But Typhoon is designed to such fine specifications that the loss of the gun created a weight imbalance and it was finally realised that the cheaper and easier option would be to fit a real cannon.
The RAF has been forced into an embarrassing U-turn on its policy of not allowing pilots of the new Eurofighter Typhoon to fire their gun.
The service has decided to issue ammunition to future Typhoon squadrons and train pilots in using the fighter's single German-made 27mm Mauser cannon, reversing its cost-cutting edict.
The decision follows experience in Afghanistan showing that guns are still one of the most effective weapons when supporting ground troops.
In a scathing e-mail, a Parachute Regiment major commanding an isolated outpost described air support from RAF Harriers, which have no guns and rely on rockets, as "utterly, utterly useless".
He contrasted their performance with the support offered by US air force A10 aircraft, which are equipped with a 27mm rotary cannon.
At a conference last week, Air Vice-Marshal David Walker, the officer commanding No 1 Group, which includes the Harrier and the newly-forming Typhoon squadrons, said he had decided to proceed with the Typhoon gun, buying ammunition, spares and maintenance equipment.
Seven years ago, the ministry decided to dispense with the gun on all but the first 55 of the 232 Typhoons planned for RAF service, in contrast to the other nations in the Eurofighter consortium, which kept it on all ordered aircraft.
The experts argued that Typhoon did not need anything as crude as a gun. The plan would have saved the taxpayer about £90 million.
But Typhoon is designed to such fine specifications that the loss of the gun created a weight imbalance and it was finally realised that the cheaper and easier option would be to fit a real cannon.
Edited by andymadmak on Friday 20th April 11:27
andymadmak said:
Although the RAF wanted theirs without guns, I was told, on this very forum no less, that RAF Typhoons actually DO have the Mauser cannon fitted after all - it was cheaper to leave it in apparently. Happy to be corrected (again! )
Yeah,, i thought they had them fitted but went along with the flow. ) 
It states they have the mauser on the raf web site as well.
So thats alright then. I wont lose too much sleep tonight worrying about Typhoons lack of WVR dogfight ability.
Edited by Dr Banjo on Friday 20th April 11:30
andymadmak said:
Dr Banjo said:
Hooli said:
You mean something as stupid as ordering them without any guns fitted?
Agreed, if I was a Typhoon jock a cannon would provide some contingency and reassurance.If the engagement looks like going WVR then either bug out or put your faith in the ASRAAM.
What other choice would the jock have ?
Edited by Dr Banjo on Friday 20th April 11:00
) Here is some evidence from the Telegraph
2006 Telegraph article said:
12:01AM BST 03 Oct 2006
The experts argued that Typhoon did not need anything as crude as a gun. The plan would have saved the taxpayer about £90 million.
But Typhoon is designed to such fine specifications that the loss of the gun created a weight imbalance and it was finally realised that the cheaper and easier option would be to fit a real cannon.
The experts argued that Typhoon did not need anything as crude as a gun. The plan would have saved the taxpayer about £90 million.
But Typhoon is designed to such fine specifications that the loss of the gun created a weight imbalance and it was finally realised that the cheaper and easier option would be to fit a real cannon.
Edited by andymadmak on Friday 20th April 11:27
kwits and should be ignored and sacked, have they not heard what happened to the F4 Phantom in Vietnam, the US have learnt the lesson and have even put a 20mm Vulcan cannon on the Raptor.Some 'experts' have a habit of making unfounded assumptions on how future wars will be fought. I recently one such 'expert' saying that future campaigns wouldn't be fought with IEDs. These were the same people that said Iraq and Afghanistan wouldn't be fought with IEDs, although anyone with an appreciation of recent military campaigns world-wide could have told them that there was a very good chance that they would be. I can't say for certain how the next war will be fought but a good way of making an assessment is looking at the way previous ones have been fought.
BruceV8 said:
Some 'experts' have a habit of making unfounded assumptions on how future wars will be fought. I recently one such 'expert' saying that future campaigns wouldn't be fought with IEDs. These were the same people that said Iraq and Afghanistan wouldn't be fought with IEDs, although anyone with an appreciation of recent military campaigns world-wide could have told them that there was a very good chance that they would be. I can't say for certain how the next war will be fought but a good way of making an assessment is looking at the way previous ones have been fought.
IEDs are cheap and work; who wouldn't want to use them?Ian Lancs said:
fandango_c said:
CBR JGWRR said:
And eurofighters don't have that many seconds worth of bullets.
RAF ones have zero seconds of bullets 
ks.All Typhoons are fitted with a gun, which is loaded when required (which includes QRA)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/921...
Interesting that we have an official plan for 'recapturing the Falklands after a successful Argentine invasion'...
Interesting that we have an official plan for 'recapturing the Falklands after a successful Argentine invasion'...
fandango_c said:
Ian Lancs said:
fandango_c said:
CBR JGWRR said:
And eurofighters don't have that many seconds worth of bullets.
RAF ones have zero seconds of bullets ks.All Typhoons are fitted with a gun, which is loaded when required (which includes QRA)
The story goes...
Typhoon originally designed with a cannon (same one as fitted to Tornado). MoD ops requirements then decided that they didn't need one as any future air war would be fought outside the range of a gun - no thoughts given to air to surface strafing. Unfortunately, the Flight Control System needs to know exactly what weight is where on the aircraft, so removing the gun may have saved the cost of buying the gun, but then we either had to rewrite all the flying control software (kerching!) or replace it with ballast (concrete was talked about in the press).
Thankfully after a bit of "discussion" the gun was refitted.
Ayahuasca said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/921...
Interesting that we have an official plan for 'recapturing the Falklands after a successful Argentine invasion'...
Oooh I would give a tenner to see those "Recapture The Falklands Plans". Interesting that we have an official plan for 'recapturing the Falklands after a successful Argentine invasion'...
Especially as we have no carrier. Alot of responsibility on the Type 45 captains perhaps ?
Edited by Dr Banjo on Saturday 21st April 11:44
Ian Lancs said:
fandango_c said:
CBR JGWRR said:
And eurofighters don't have that many seconds worth of bullets.
RAF ones have zero seconds of bullets ks.All Typhoons are fitted with a gun, which is loaded when required (which includes QRA)
Edit: I've signed the official secrets act - I'm probably not even allowed to say they have the cannon...
CBR JGWRR said:
IanMorewood said:
CBR JGWRR said:
Yeah, but they do have cameras...
You didnt mean cameras either did you or cannons you were on about the wings I think.
I guess I can say they have a cannon, just nothing technical.
Conflict where some poor jock is relying on the Typhoon cannon/camera
In your lifetime ?
Edited by Dr Banjo on Saturday 21st April 22:54
The Sun are reporting a successful strike - 1 billion barrels rumour...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff