EuroFighter Tycoon
Discussion
So in your opinion does this meet the defense needs of the U.K?
Was asking because Im curious as to what are the future plans?. If any. Surely the poor economic climate may have altered RAF targets, plans, etc.
This is/was a joint project, and some recent upgrades have been introduced. But does anyone know if these are used in foreign conflicts? or just purely mainland defense?
Was asking because I've noticed Russia is taking steps to build true 5th gen planes. But besides that. Do you like this and think it is enough for the next say, 20-25years? And does anyone know how many Britain has?
Was asking because Im curious as to what are the future plans?. If any. Surely the poor economic climate may have altered RAF targets, plans, etc.
This is/was a joint project, and some recent upgrades have been introduced. But does anyone know if these are used in foreign conflicts? or just purely mainland defense?
Was asking because I've noticed Russia is taking steps to build true 5th gen planes. But besides that. Do you like this and think it is enough for the next say, 20-25years? And does anyone know how many Britain has?
Air defence - to replace aircraft like the Phantom and the Tornado F3.
It originated with BAe's Agile Combat Aircraft programme. There was a model of the proposed ACA on display at the 1982 Farnborough AIr Show.
The proof of concept aircraft (the Experimental Aircraft Programme) actually flew at the 1986 Farnborough show
But due to severe delays caused by the politicians (mainly the Germans) the project had a rocky time in the 1990s which slowed it down very badly. It's entry into service was therefore much later than originally planned.
It may not have all the capabilities of an F-22, but the chances of it having to fight an F-22 for real are precisely Nil. The US will not be building many DFF-22 asthey are too expensive, even for the US and they do not intend to export any F-22s either.
So, in view of the type of opposition they might come up against, the Typhoon will be more than capable.
The ground attack role has been added on to the Typhoons "to do" list in an effort to make it a more cost effective design.
It originated with BAe's Agile Combat Aircraft programme. There was a model of the proposed ACA on display at the 1982 Farnborough AIr Show.
The proof of concept aircraft (the Experimental Aircraft Programme) actually flew at the 1986 Farnborough show
But due to severe delays caused by the politicians (mainly the Germans) the project had a rocky time in the 1990s which slowed it down very badly. It's entry into service was therefore much later than originally planned.
It may not have all the capabilities of an F-22, but the chances of it having to fight an F-22 for real are precisely Nil. The US will not be building many DFF-22 asthey are too expensive, even for the US and they do not intend to export any F-22s either.
So, in view of the type of opposition they might come up against, the Typhoon will be more than capable.
The ground attack role has been added on to the Typhoons "to do" list in an effort to make it a more cost effective design.
I'm probably a bit biased as I work on them but, even I can see it's the platform for the next 20 years. Typhoon gets quite a bit of bad press "relic of the cold war" "late and over budget" but the things to remember are that tornados are getting old harriers are on there way off and ucavs are ten years off proper in service. Typhoon fills the gap. I respect people will say why do we need fighters when the troops need tanks ect. But you have to plan for tomorrow. Trident is the same planning for tomorrow.
The thing that always strikes we with the f22 typhoon showdown is the fact no one ever considers how much money the us put into f22 money the us will never get back. Typhoon has at present 2 export customers plus the 4 partner nations returning at least some of the investment capital. Also with the economic turn down it's good to know that typhoon is percentage wise built in the uk. I'm told that it was or is europs biggest engineering project.
The thing that always strikes we with the f22 typhoon showdown is the fact no one ever considers how much money the us put into f22 money the us will never get back. Typhoon has at present 2 export customers plus the 4 partner nations returning at least some of the investment capital. Also with the economic turn down it's good to know that typhoon is percentage wise built in the uk. I'm told that it was or is europs biggest engineering project.
XG332 said:
Are we not getting the F-35 when its finished?
For the Royal Navy - I thought.The F-35 would be a less capable aircarft than the Typhoon. Quite a bit of capability is sacrificed for the ability to hover and land/take off vertically.
It is an aircraft designed for a specific task - which no doubt it will do well - like the Harrier.
But even the F-35 is over budget and late and there are some issues over the level of technology that the US will "allow" the British F-35s to contain (which is exteremely cheeky of them).
Eric Mc said:
Air defence - to replace aircraft like the Phantom and the Tornado F3.
It originated with BAe's Agile Combat Aircraft programme. There was a model of the proposed ACA on display at the 1982 Farnborough AIr Show.
The proof of concept aircraft (the Experimental Aircraft Programme) actually flew at the 1986 Farnborough show
But due to severe delays caused by the politicians (mainly the Germans) the project had a rocky time in the 1990s which slowed it down very badly. It's entry into service was therefore much later than originally planned.
It may not have all the capabilities of an F-22, but the chances of it having to fight an F-22 for real are precisely Nil. The US will not be building many DFF-22 asthey are too expensive, even for the US and they do not intend to export any F-22s either.
So, in view of the type of opposition they might come up against, the Typhoon will be more than capable.
The ground attack role has been added on to the Typhoons "to do" list in an effort to make it a more cost effective design.
So the Eurofighter & F22 are built to do the same job, just the Eurofighter has had other things added to its list of 'To do' jobs.It originated with BAe's Agile Combat Aircraft programme. There was a model of the proposed ACA on display at the 1982 Farnborough AIr Show.
The proof of concept aircraft (the Experimental Aircraft Programme) actually flew at the 1986 Farnborough show
But due to severe delays caused by the politicians (mainly the Germans) the project had a rocky time in the 1990s which slowed it down very badly. It's entry into service was therefore much later than originally planned.
It may not have all the capabilities of an F-22, but the chances of it having to fight an F-22 for real are precisely Nil. The US will not be building many DFF-22 asthey are too expensive, even for the US and they do not intend to export any F-22s either.
So, in view of the type of opposition they might come up against, the Typhoon will be more than capable.
The ground attack role has been added on to the Typhoons "to do" list in an effort to make it a more cost effective design.
What makes a plane better at Ground Attack to Air Defence? Obviously I understand an Air Defence Plane must be very agile etc as to out do the other plane its against, but with Ground Attack isn't that just fly over, find the target and let the guided missles do the rest?
To be honest, since the early 1960s, most "fighter" aircraft have been built with some degree of "bombing" capability. Indeed the division between fighter and bomber began to be blurred during World War Two. A number of fighter designs proved even more adept as bombers/ground attack - such as the Corsair, Huirricane, Typhoon and Thunderbolt. The Germans used Messerschmitt 109s and Focke Wuld 190s in the "Jabo" ground attack/light bomber role.
The F-4 Phantom (first flight 1958) was designed as a Fleet Defence Fighter) but in the Vietnam War was used by both the USAF and US navy primarilly in the ground attack role.
The F-15 Eagle was perceived as a pure fighter - as was the F-16 Falcon. Yet both are now used extensively as ground attack aircarft.
Even today, the bulk of ground attack work is caried out by iron bombs rather than by missiles - although many combat aircraft have the ability to guide the bombs on target using laser designation systems.
No doubt, if required, the F-22 can be adapted for teh ground attack role.
The F-4 Phantom (first flight 1958) was designed as a Fleet Defence Fighter) but in the Vietnam War was used by both the USAF and US navy primarilly in the ground attack role.
The F-15 Eagle was perceived as a pure fighter - as was the F-16 Falcon. Yet both are now used extensively as ground attack aircarft.
Even today, the bulk of ground attack work is caried out by iron bombs rather than by missiles - although many combat aircraft have the ability to guide the bombs on target using laser designation systems.
No doubt, if required, the F-22 can be adapted for teh ground attack role.
Jonny671 said:
What makes a plane better at Ground Attack to Air Defence? Obviously I understand an Air Defence Plane must be very agile etc as to out do the other plane its against, but with Ground Attack isn't that just fly over, find the target and let the guided missles do the rest?
The real Apache said:
Jonny671 said:
What makes a plane better at Ground Attack to Air Defence? Obviously I understand an Air Defence Plane must be very agile etc as to out do the other plane its against, but with Ground Attack isn't that just fly over, find the target and let the guided missles do the rest?
aeropilot said:
XG332 said:
Are we not getting the F-35 when if its finished?
EFA 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10648250
digimeistter said:
aeropilot said:
XG332 said:
Are we not getting the F-35 when if its finished?
EFA http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10648250
Thanks for the replies people.
To my understanding, the Tycoon was built to be an ace fighter more than anything else. It is extremely agile plane that can pull off some tight moves.
However, as it's primary role is 'to shoot down enemy aircraft' it probably relies on BVR shoot down more than say agilty (which will come in handy aginst enemy missiles)
In any future conflict with the ruskies, I reckon we would be on the defensive for atleast a month. As we are a small nation, air superiority is an absolute must. But am not sure how big the RAF is in terms of upto date fighters.? Does anyone know the exact number? and if their used in current conflicts?
F-22, I would say is better than the Eurofighter. (5th gen, vs a very good 4th gen.) However the F-35, is not better in fighter roles and I dont see the UK as a export customer ($140mil a plane?).
Trident should be scrapped and the £££ put into army, and RAF. Any nuclear exchange wont see us (a small island) very well off.
PS- not a war mongrer, but prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
To my understanding, the Tycoon was built to be an ace fighter more than anything else. It is extremely agile plane that can pull off some tight moves.
However, as it's primary role is 'to shoot down enemy aircraft' it probably relies on BVR shoot down more than say agilty (which will come in handy aginst enemy missiles)
In any future conflict with the ruskies, I reckon we would be on the defensive for atleast a month. As we are a small nation, air superiority is an absolute must. But am not sure how big the RAF is in terms of upto date fighters.? Does anyone know the exact number? and if their used in current conflicts?
F-22, I would say is better than the Eurofighter. (5th gen, vs a very good 4th gen.) However the F-35, is not better in fighter roles and I dont see the UK as a export customer ($140mil a plane?).
Trident should be scrapped and the £££ put into army, and RAF. Any nuclear exchange wont see us (a small island) very well off.
PS- not a war mongrer, but prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
MudasarKhan said:
Thanks for the replies people.
To my understanding, the Tycoon was built to be an ace fighter more than anything else. It is extremely agile plane that can pull off some tight moves.
However, as it's primary role is 'to shoot down enemy aircraft' it probably relies on BVR shoot down more than say agilty (which will come in handy aginst enemy missiles)
In any future conflict with the ruskies, I reckon we would be on the defensive for atleast a month. As we are a small nation, air superiority is an absolute must. But am not sure how big the RAF is in terms of upto date fighters.? Does anyone know the exact number? and if their used in current conflicts?
F-22, I would say is better than the Eurofighter. (5th gen, vs a very good 4th gen.) However the F-35, is not better in fighter roles and I dont see the UK as a export customer ($140mil a plane?).
Trident should be scrapped and the £££ put into army, and RAF. Any nuclear exchange wont see us (a small island) very well off.
PS- not a war mongrer, but prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
We've got 3 F35 test planes paid for from the US, so probably will be getting them. Apparently we're going to order 138 of them.To my understanding, the Tycoon was built to be an ace fighter more than anything else. It is extremely agile plane that can pull off some tight moves.
However, as it's primary role is 'to shoot down enemy aircraft' it probably relies on BVR shoot down more than say agilty (which will come in handy aginst enemy missiles)
In any future conflict with the ruskies, I reckon we would be on the defensive for atleast a month. As we are a small nation, air superiority is an absolute must. But am not sure how big the RAF is in terms of upto date fighters.? Does anyone know the exact number? and if their used in current conflicts?
F-22, I would say is better than the Eurofighter. (5th gen, vs a very good 4th gen.) However the F-35, is not better in fighter roles and I dont see the UK as a export customer ($140mil a plane?).
Trident should be scrapped and the £££ put into army, and RAF. Any nuclear exchange wont see us (a small island) very well off.
PS- not a war mongrer, but prepare for the worst and hope for the best.
I don't agree about Nuclear, we are a small Island but one of the big players so the way things are going, Nuclear is a must even just as a deterrant IMO.
BAE Harrier = 75
Panavia Tornado F3 = 54
GR4/GR4A = 137
F3 to be phased out early 2011
Eurofighter Typhoon T1/T1A/F2/T3/FGR4 = 62
Confirmed order of 160 airframes, additional 72 as of yet uncommited.
Total Frontline Combat aircraft = Total 328
Thats from Wikipedia.. So not many considering we get dragged into every warzone going.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff