UK fighters

[lawtoni]

Could someone please explain to me why we need the joint strike fighter (jump jet or otherwise) when we have the eurofighter?

The eurofighter to the (my) untrained eye is very capable in air to air, air to ground, carries all sorts of weapons, is supersonic, etc...

Why are we again spending billions on a new type of fighter??

thanks in advance for your thoughts

[Godalmighty83]

The typhoon cant launch from a carrier and was never designed for naval operations.

It was also designed as a true fighter with a focus on a ir to air performance while the JSF is designed to carry ordinance for all round operations in much greater balance which is more important for a carrier.

[TheEnd]

It's for longer ranged carrier stuff I thought.
The two options were jump jet which can go anywhere, or a carrier version which needs a catapult.

Both can be stuck on a ship and sailed out to little islands where there isn't much in the way of nearby friendly countries.

[Odie]

The JSF also has stealthy sneakyness too.

[lawtoni]

seems like there is an awful lot of overlap though between the two.
do we REALLY need both, I'm less and less sure.

[Odie]

lawtoni said:

seems like there is an awful lot of overlap though between the two.
do we REALLY need both, I'm less and less sure.

We cant operate the eurofighter from a carrier, so the option is to buy f35a for the airforce too and sell the eurofighters we have and have pilots trained for.


Eurofighters are probably cheaper and cheaper to operate than the f35.

[Godalmighty83]

lawtoni said:

seems like there is an awful lot of overlap though between the two.
do we REALLY need both, I'm less and less sure.

Well as one cant be used on a carrier and is focused on anti-air while the other doesn't have the ideal range for land based airstrips and is a multi-role there isnt much overlap.

A navalised version of the typhoon would be quite a undertaking.

Odie said:

Eurofighters are probably cheaper and cheaper to operate than the f35.

Euro-fighters are about 1/3rd of the price per unit if memory serves.

[lawtoni]

Well as one cant be used on a carrier and is focused on anti-air while the other doesn't have the ideal range for land based airstrips and is a multi-role there isnt much overlap.

A navalised version of the typhoon would be quite a undertaking.
[/quote]


In that case, why did we get into the eurofighter?
surely we could have had the visibility that 5 years later something much better/versatile would come along?

[Odie]

lawtoni said:

In that case, why did we get into the eurofighter?
surely we could have had the visibility that 5 years later something much better/versatile would come along?

Politics

[Zaxxon]

I doubt the F35 will be as good as the Typhoon no matter what version.

Although we should have just gone for F-18's anyway.

Edited by Zaxxon on Friday 11th May 14:53

[disco1]

lawtoni said:

Could someone please explain to me why we need the joint strike fighter (jump jet or otherwise) when we have the eurofighter?

The eurofighter to the (my) untrained eye is very capable in air to air, air to ground, carries all sorts of weapons, is supersonic, etc...

Why are we again spending billions on a new type of fighter??

thanks in advance for your thoughts

My thoughts on the set up are:

Typhoon - In my eyes it's stunning, however:
- Hugely comprised
- Isn't doing air 2 ground very well
- Been shown up recently in air 2 air by rafale and F16s
- Too much politics/BAe merry go round
- Delivered a decade or two late
- Not enough of them and the ones that are there are being cannibilised
- Would cost gazillions to navalise
- We should have gone for F15 Strike Eagles in the 80s and early 90s

F35
- Ship based & multi role
- Stealth
- Costs loads
- And that's about all we know at the moment
- Should have gone for F18 super bugs/growlers 5 years ago, by now we'd be flying hundreds of these off land and USN carriers ensuring the proper support/resources/experiences are in place before we stick them on our cat & trap carriers.

All in all it's a lesson on how not to do procurement

[Godalmighty83]

lawtoni said:

In that case, why did we get into the eurofighter?
surely we could have had the visibility that 5 years later something much better/versatile would come along?

The problem is something better always comes along every 5 years, you have to jump in at some point or be left behind by generations.

Sir out spitfires are 70 years old.
Be patient airman a better plane is only 5 years away.
Thats what you said 5 years ago!

Also we got into the eurofighter project back in the 80's before the f35 was a twinkle in anyone's eyes.


edit-

disco1, while I agree on many points that recent procurement has been questionable to say the least buying in every plane and ship from the states would only save money up until the point the UK plane and ship manufacturing industry you have just killed all walk into the dole office. Money sent abroad isn't money you ever see again even if supporting your own countries industries initially cost more you eventually get it back in taxes.

Edited by Godalmighty83 on Friday 11th May 14:41

[kooky guy]

It's a bit more than 5 years later as well.

[LotusOmega375D]

There's always something potentially better in the pipeline, but you've got to make a decision sooner or later.

Whether it turns out to be the correct one or not...

I think there are reasonable options out there for the RAF, but the Navy is a bit chuggered to be honest. I still think F18s are a backward step in this day and age. Rather have the Rafale myself.

[Mr_B]

Out of interest since everyone seems to give the answer " should have bought F18's " of every thread, would these not be quite old and out of date quiet soon and very old by the end of the service life if they were purcahsed now and delivered in what I guess would be a good few years time ?

[disco1]

Godalmighty83 said:

disco1, while I agree on many points that recent procurement has been questionable to say the least buying in every plane and ship from the states would only save money up until the point the UK plane and ship manufacturing industry you have just killed all walk into the dole office. Money sent abroad isn't money you ever see again even if supporting your own countries industries initially cost more you eventually get it back in taxes.

Edited by Godalmighty83 on Friday 11th May 14:41

I don't buy this whole British jobs/skilled workforce thing. We should get the best thing we can for our bunts without the political element slowing things down and compromising the end product.

On a different note what has our highly skilled military workforce/civil servants/engineers/designers delivered that is actually any good? There's massive question marks around every bit of kit we have.

[lawtoni]

[quote=Godalmighty83]

The problem is something better always comes along every 5 years, you have to jump in at some point or be left behind by generations.

Sir out spitfires are 70 years old.
Be patient airman a better plane is only 5 years away.
Thats what you said 5 years ago!

Also we got into the eurofighter project back in the 80's before the f35 was a twinkle in anyone's eyes.


edit-

disco1, while I agree on many points that recent procurement has been questionable to say the least buying in every plane and ship from the states would only save money up until the point the UK plane and ship manufacturing industry you have just killed all walk into the dole office. Money sent abroad isn't money you ever see again even if supporting your own countries industries initially cost more you eventually get it back in taxes.




but it doesnt seem a case of something better has come along. more something we needed all along bu what we previously bought doesnt fulfill has come along
we must have known that the we needed something which can launch from a carrier.
we knew that the eurofighter doesnt do carriers

so why did we spend billions on eurofighters??
we nowhave at least 3 types of fighter jets, the eurofighter and the joint strike having decades to run along side each other before either are obselete.

[telecat]

disco1 said:

Godalmighty83 said:

disco1, while I agree on many points that recent procurement has been questionable to say the least buying in every plane and ship from the states would only save money up until the point the UK plane and ship manufacturing industry you have just killed all walk into the dole office. Money sent abroad isn't money you ever see again even if supporting your own countries industries initially cost more you eventually get it back in taxes.

Edited by Godalmighty83 on Friday 11th May 14:41

I don't buy this whole British jobs/skilled workforce thing. We should get the best thing we can for our bunts without the political element slowing things down and compromising the end product.

On a different note what has our highly skilled military workforce/civil servants/engineers/designers delivered that is actually any good? There's massive question marks around every bit of kit we have.

And everybody else's as well. The British Aircraft Industry has a good track record and the Typhoon like the F15 was designed as a pure High Speed dog fighter to take on Soviet Fighters. It is superior to the Rafale and F16 it's recent defeats to them in orders have more to do with Politics than the actual performance of the aircraft. The F15 was developed into the E model and I expect if the Politicians every get their finger out and realise it Typhoon will be too.

Many people will remember the F111 debarcle where the US persuaded the UK it would be a great "Fighter Bomber". It came in overweight, underpowered and totally unsuited to the roles it originally was designed for. Whereas the Harrier, Lightning, Buccaneer, Canberra, Vulcan, Victor, Nimrod and Hawk all did the job to the point that they exceeded their original life spans by some way. Even the Joint projects like Tornado and Jaguar have done the same. For every B52 in the states there is a B58 or F111. The F15 is suffering problems to the point that the USAF will be Short of them soon. etc etc etc. We have a good aero industry constantly held back by the MOD not investing in their products or interfering and limiting the capability of those products.

On other fronts the SA80 is constantly derided despite the fact every other 5.56mm NATO rifle has had similar or worse problems. The French FAMAS and the M16 have both had problems in the field similar to and in many cases worse than the SA80. The Challenger MBT is probably the best all round MBT at the moment. All these are products of British Engineering.

[Zaxxon]

telecat said:

On other fronts the SA80 is constantly derided

Was constantly derided (although I found it to be perfectley fine as long as you kept it clean and oiled).

The SA80 Mk2 is now viewed as a very good weapon.

[tuffer]

Because the Govt decided that they had not quit spunked enough money on the Eurofighter debacle so launched into a new round farcical defense contracts in order to procure yet another white elephant. Luckily we have a huge surplus of cash sloshing around that we really need to get rid of before the end of this financial year.