The EF consortium companies!
http://defensenews.com/blogs/farnborough/2010/07/20/eurofighter-firms-to-fund-aesa-development-for-9-months/

Okaaaay?…

Lets go back a little bit, please. First off, you’re the one that claimed and said, I quote; “EF radar, which hardly will be ready till 2014/15, if at all.” Of which is saying, its unlikely to be ready or even it probably won’t be…So basically what you’re saying is, you doubt it.

…Then I said; “Says who?” Then I wrote a paragragh or two from a source saying an AESA will have an in-service of 2015, i.e. an AFM magazine which happens to be, frankly, reliable first had knowledge of what goes on in the military aviation world.

Then you reply to my “says who?” comment by posting a link saying pretty much the same as the one I mentioned. The AESA will be in-service of 2015. I haven’t come across anything of Eurofighter saying “AESA will not be in service by 2015!”

Thanks Aspis, an interesting read. 😉

Please show comparable data and do no twisting around when proven wrong. The twin engine Lightnings did not operate low level over Germany in adverse conditions. They were tasked with the ADIZ and USAFE Buffer ZONE intercepts and operated behind the SAM-belts. Just two GAF Wings operated the F-104 as interceptors and honest people will compare that loss rate with the similar tasked double engine Lightning at least. In the first years the F-16 was nicknamed “Lawndart” before the childhood diseases of the F100 were overcome and the ones operating that had learned to avoid G-lock losses. All that with the technology of the 70s and not of the 50s. But I fear too many details for people used to headlines. :rolleyes:

Twisting?…

Well, I have a little something some people might find interesting.

A few paragraphs taken from a story by Sqn Ldr Clive Rowley MBE RAF Ret’d who operated the Lightning F2A in Germany.

‘From 1965 up to early 1977, during the height of the Cold War, there were two RAF Lightning units based in Germany, Numbers 19 and 92 Squadrons. From 1968, these squadrons operated the Lightning F2A; only 31 examples of this mark of Lightning were produced from upgraded F2s. The concept of operations for the Germany Lightning Squadrons were significantly different from that for the employment of the Lightning in the UK and elsewhere.’

‘Speaking personally, I was delighted when I learned that I was to be posted from the Lightning conversion unit at RAF Coltishall to 19 Squadron at RAF Gutersloh in January in 1974 as a young Flying Officer first-tourist Lightning pilot. I already knew something of the employment of the Lightning in Germany and it was apparent that the dark green camouflage scheme applied to the upper surfaces of the F2As was partly due to their low-level role. The prospect of this type of flying appealed to me greatly and I also knew that, in Cold War terms, these aircraft were operating on the front line.’

All-Weather, Day Or Night

‘Some routine training flying for the Germany based Lightning squadrons was directed at maintaining the skills required for Battle Flight sorties. Pilots had to be able intercept and visually identify (VID) targets at all heights and speeds, in all-weather, by day or night and, if necessary, shadow them or shepherd them out of the Buffer Zone or to an airfield. The training also included the handling of airborne ‘defectors’.

‘Much of the Germany Lightning squadrons’ routine training, however, was orientated towards their wartime role. In common with Lightning squadrons in other theatres there was a requirement in 2ATAF to be able to conduct all-weather intercepts and engagements under close, limited, loose or broadcast control from a fighter controller on the ground, including against high flying and/or supersonic targets. These events were routinely practised, with intercepts against targets at speeds up to M1.6 and high-flying targets up to 56,000ft conducted in a special corridor, which was cleared for supersonic flying overland above 36,000ft.’

‘We also practiced engagements against radar ‘jamming’ targets, often at night, with the Canberra T17s of 360 Squadron providing the ‘jamming’. All this was common to Lightning operators in other theatres, but in Germany the nature of the potential threat and the integrated nature of NATO defences resulted in some significant differences in the concept of operations.’

‘The airborne threat was principally made up of Soviet Bloc fighter or fighter-bomber aircraft rather than the heavy bomber threat that faced the UK Lightning squadrons. It was, therefore, essential that Germany-based Lightning pilots were trained to a high standard in fighter-v-fighter air combat manoeuvring. Most engagements were expected to occur at low-level, as enemy aircraft would probably attempt to use terrain masking to avoid radar detection and engagement by numerous NATO SAM sites.’

‘In addition, manned fighter aircraft were only a part of the overall NATO integrated air defence system. In a ‘shooting war’ NATO air defence fighters would have to operate in Fighter Engagement Zones (FEZs) from the surface up to a specified altitude. The FEZs were surrounded to the East, West and above by Missile Engagement Zones (MEZs), in which the SAM batteries would have freedom to engage and pursuit of targets by fighters would normally have to be broken off. Therefore, Germany-based Lightning pilots had to become expert at engaging targets at low-level overland.’

‘It would be fair to say that the Gutersloh Lightning pilots feared no-one and believed that the combination of their aircraft’s performance and their own skills was a match for any opponent. The era of the F2A in Germany was in many ways the heyday of the Lightning. The pilots felt that they were flying an aircraft that was truly capable of the job required of it if it ever came to a ‘shooting war’ and they were able to hold their heads high in the international military aviation community.’

‘This was borne out by the Tactical Evaluation (TACEVAL) results that RAF Gutersloh and its Lightning squadrons achieved; these TACEVALS were a severe test of a wing’s operational capability. When the Gutersloh Lightning Wing finally stood down in 1977 the Chief of Air Staff wrote to the Station Commander saying “…..you chose the right way to finish the Lightning era, with the best TACEVAL results for an Air Defence Wing in NATO history.”

I got these words from an Aviation Classics magazine, English Electric Lightning, issue 5. Bought it last year, 2010.

Given the choice of the two, I’d have to go for the F-4, every time. Even a nutter wouldn’t go for something that is nic-named; “The Widowmaker!” Even the USAF didn’t want it, hence why the Luftwaffe got ripped-off in purchasing them, poor sods!

Sorry but, it was just a heap of white elephant dung! Read what Commander Ade Orchard RN thought of it on the Harrier thread.

Which shouldn’t be surprising at all, but it’s still ready now and will be more mature in 2014, when the first squad should be delivered to IAF. Compare that to Gripen, or EF radar, which hardly will be ready till 2014/15, if at all.

Says who? The AESA radar for the Typhoon at least will be ready by 2015.

A quote from AirForces Monthly magazine, January 2011 issue, page 43 in a piece about the Typhoon.

‘Though Typhoon’s mechanically-scanned Captor radar has a formidable reputation, a new generation AESA radar is increasingly seen as essential for modern fighters, esopecially for multi-role and air-to-ground use. Incoporating a AESA is there regarded as being a vital enabler for Typhoon export campaigns in key markets, including India and as a ‘must-have’ enhancement for the air forces of the Eurofighter partner nations.

Eurofighter announced the launch of full-scale development of an AESA radar for the aircraft at Farnborough Air Show in July 2010, with a target in-service date of 2015. A ‘protocol of intent’, launching the programme and providing pre-finance through to March 2011, was signed by the British, German, Italian and Spanish national armaments directors earler in 2010, and work officially began on July 1, 2010.’

So, it is likely we’ll see an AESA in service with Typhoon in 2015. Just in time for India, too.

Funny the things you find and quote when you’re bored and WAITING for the girlfriend to hurry up and get ready!!!!! Happy new year. *sigh* 😀

Not at all, say what you like, I’ve got too much of a life to worry about it. *shrugs*

Anywho.

Theres a very nice and interesting piece about the Sea Harrier in the AirForces Monthly magazine, January 2011 edition. ‘What makes a Great Air Defence Fighter?’ (pages 70-77) by Commander Ade Orchard OBE RN. He tells a short story about fighting the F-104 Starfighter while he was flying the FRS1 and the FA2. Heres what he said:

Old School Intercepter: The F-104 Starfighter. Page 75.

The F-104 Starfighter was an aircraft I fought against many times in my Sea Harrier FRS1 and FA2 days. It had a dreadfully short range fuel capacity, had poor visibility from the cockpit, and with tiny stub wings had a turning circle the same as Texas at fighting speed. The enthusiastic Italian Air Force pilots who flew it squezzed the best from it they could but bottom line for them was that they fought in straight lines at speeds greater than Mach 1.5 where possible. Turning more than 90′ was forbiddin, as they knew they could not expect to win a visual dog fight started from a neutral position due to its huge turning circle at high speed or the very poor turn rate they could generate with such small lifting surfaces at lower speeds. In similar air combat training, with an engine that sipped fuel at medium altitude, Sea Harrier pilots flying against each other could expect to spend at least an hour actually engaged in fighting, in which time we would achieve at least five or six intercepts beginning from 40nm (74km) apart. An average engagement against the F-104 lasted five minutes. We would be ready for a ‘fight’s on in our Sea Harriers, manning our combat air patrol position at around Mach 0.8, while the Starfighters would be accelerating from Mach 0.9 to Mach 1.5 in a wide 180’ turn towards us. With a combined closing speed of over Mach 2.0, the 40-mile (64km) distance between us was covered in less than two minutes, with both sides trying to gain contact on our basic radars and slewing heat-seeking AIM-9L sidewinders onto each other.

The radar on the Starfighter was so poor they rarely attempted to utilise their AIM-7 Sparrow semi-active missiles – easily defeated by use of manoeuvre and simple chaff programmes – relying on a ‘hit and run’ style using the more reliable AIM-9L in the head sector. In our case, as the Sea Harrier was non-afterburning, we were already quite a cool target and therefore presented a very fleeting acquisition opportunity for an infra-red seeker. The Starfighters however, were anything but cool, and we were invariably below them as they were supersonic at 25,000ft (7,620m) or higher, thus making our radar work much easier and putting the hot source of the Mach 1.5 rocket-powered dart against a cool Italian sky.

Some of my longest range frontal AIM-9L/M seeker locks were against the venerable F-104G at ranges into double figures of nautical miles; usually, we might expect to achieve a frontal missile lock at no more than around 4-5 miles (6-8km). This is because the seeker head looks for a discrete heat back of the aircraft – is somewhat blanked from the missile’s sight. This makes it more challenging to break out a discrete heat source and therefore get a missile lock. Once the engagement was complete, the Starfighter would invariably have run out of fuel and we were left to fight ‘in house’ against each other for the remaining range slot. For all her limitations, the F-104G was a beautiful machine flown by passionate and skilful pilots. The thrill of seeing the pure vertical departure of a Starfighter on an early morning in Sardinia was equalled only by the fear of watching one coming in to land at over 220kts barely held aloft by those stubby wings.

-Commander Ade Orchard OBE RN

Been called a lot of things in my time but, “sissy school girl.” Wow, I love it.
I have to say though that your philosophy is all wrong. If enough people had made enough fuss back in 1957, that idiot Duncan Sands might have been stopped in his tracks.
If enough people had made enough fuss back in 1965, TSR2 might have become a massive British technological success.
If enough people had made enough fuss back in 1988, Alan Bond’s HOTOL might have taken over the satellite launching industry from the Americans.
THAT’S THE POINT. You damn well MAKE them listen. It’s OUR money.
For the record, I love the Harrier. If we’d had a decent government that recognised the worth of British technology, we could have cleaned-up with that aircraft…a production run to match the equally great (and equally British) Hunter.

Well, sorry but, your last post, #18, made it look like an attack, not on a personal level but just in general. Hence why I replied. It would’ve been in a different manner what you said now, then. Don’t take it personally, you know.

I think a lot of fuss was made back then. My girlfriend, who is Arabic, had a British Grandfather who worked on the TSR-2, what his role was exactly I’m not quite sure, I’ll need to have a chat to the boss’s (girlfriend) mum about that when I see her again, although his role was, I believe wasn’t major but a minor role. Anywho, I remember the ‘mum’ mentioning that there was quite an effort to save the TSR-2 and he tried everything in his power to help with it.

Your last point is spot on, though.

What’s with the photoshop job (all grey on top & grey/white on bottom)?

To decieve the countries we’re going to invade, it’s a conspiracy theory. You see, we, the UK, your “Closest Ally”, (wink-wink) are going to invade China, Iran and Russia etc, steal all their oil and resources and live happily ever after…And be extremely rich, oh it’d be ever so nice…Anyway, it’s to let the other countries we’ve evaded think: ‘Damn the US! We hate you even more now!’ And you’ll come to the UK asking for help because they’re calling you nasty names and we’ll just say: Ohhh thats terrible isn’t it, awww how dare they…Blah, blah, blah, wibble, wibble, wibble, Oh I knoooow it’s not nice calling you that! Oh really….Yeah anyway, shut up Yank we’ve got money to spend on something we don’t really need, nor Want…What was that? You want some money?…..Eh no! It’s ours. now toodle-pip! HA! Damn you to the bowls of rotten hell! 😀

But shhhh it’s a secret! (wink-wink) 😉

Sorry this Sherry is rather nice. *hic*

😀 😀 😀