EE :

Now you insult me !?
Apologize or I complain to the Moderators , NOW .

Cheers .

For a moment I couldn’t find the letter ‘a’ and pressed the letter ‘i’ instead…

Be my guest, I couldn’t give a monkey’s toss! You insult other people’s intelligence and common sense by derailing threads with your silly nonsense claims and trolling, you get challenged and proved wrong time and time again and still, you spout more nonsense, yet the beautiful moderators tend to somehow let you off… I fancy my chances.

I could very well stick you on ignore, but that doesn’t stop me controlling other members quoting you or reading through the threads while not being logged in which I do more often than I am online.

So why not just use that little thing in your skull and think a little before you say something. I was having a humble time reading through the F-35 thread until you came along. I’d very much like to carry on without coming across your gibberish.

EE :

I know at least 4 Countries who truely believe this : France , India , the UAE and Switzerland . And I could probably add South Korea , Singapore and Brazil if not Qatar and a couple of others who ‘d like to have it too .
Maybe the UK ? :D;)

Cheers .

Thats technically two countries, actually. And even one of those hasn’t fully committed itself yet. Seven countries have committed themselves to Typhoon and a whole lot more have done so with the F-35. So what of it… :rolleyes:

@Bluewings,

As an American , djcross thinks that an old F-16 with an old pod is the equivalent of the Eurocanards !
This is BS !
The F-teens are outdated , they can still do a good job but they are outdated . Just the idea to use a “pod” for EW/ECM is outdated (unless the pod is very recent and tailored for the ACTUAL threats) .
The EW systems onboard the Eurocanards are miles ahead of the US fighters ‘s systems . Even the F-22 has no ECMs !

And as a Frenchie you think nothing comes close to Rafale…

If theres one area where the F-teens are top-notch then that’d be in the EW/ECM department, they’re very far from being “outdated” as you claim them to be. For example, why on earth do you think the RAF send their Typhoons to the US for Exercise High Rider on an annual basis?… And you do realise that all EW/ECM suites are constantly being enhanced and updated on a very regular basis, including on all three of the Eurocanards as well as the likes of Tornado etc. Ever tried keeping up with Typhoon’s enhancements regarding it’s EW/ECM suite? (well no, you obviously wouldn’t, silly question) I have, and one might as well have a pop at breaking the Da Vinci Code. With the very, very limited information we have available to us its impossible to come to a conclusion which is superior and which is inferior.

EE :

What ?

Cheers .

Page 6 of here rather:

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=121667&page=6

Rather than lecture people on doing their homework, why don’t you do yours and take a good look at your past posts and finally learn how hypocritical you are? I am rather fond of reading through these threads despite rarely posting on them, I could have you and some others on my ignore list but I believe in the benefit of the doubt. Just, do a bit more thinking for once, some people have some very interesting views, its just a shame some of them get drawn into a unnecessary discussion.

The Europeans seem lacking in many capabilities as listed above. Despite the low scale of Mali operation, NATO still had to chip in with tactical and strategic transport despite France having the most potent military in Europe.

I wouldn’t bet on France having “the most potent military in Europe”, certainly not overall if you include all branches of the armed forces!

Indeed individual European countries lack in areas when compared to others in the European Union, the UK with Carrier capable fixed wing aircraft, France with strategic transport/logistics etc, for example. Though bring all these European countries’ capabilities together you’ve got yourself a very capable, and formidable force, providing they don’t moan and bicker amonst themselves. But, you’re asking few questions that will be heavily out-weighed by answers. Somewhat simple yet still a little complicated at the same time…

Typhoon Future Capability Programme (+18 months)
•
This project will enable Typhoon aircraft to drop precision guided bombs. The delays are due to problems with developing the software (15 months) and the consequent impact caused by the need to reschedule subsequent activities such as testing (three months). The problems have also increased the forecast cost of the project by £22 million.7
Beyond Visual Range Air-to-Air Missile project (+23 months)
•
Delays in developing the software to support later elements of the Typhoon Future Capability Programme have also caused slippage to the Beyond Visual Range Air-to-Air Missile project because the integration programme has had to be rescheduled. To compensate for the slippage the Department is extending the life of the existing AMRAAM missile at a cost of approximately £50 million.

I already did it. Looks like you still trying to minimize the difficulties, heh ?

I’m already quite aware of these issues, thank you very much. However, you’ve missed out some key points which cannot be fully blamed on the Typhoon itself; “A combination of technical complexity, Partner Nation disagreement on a synthetic training solution and delays in agreement of an international support arrangement have caused the delay.” Then again, you’ve gotta “minimize the difficulties”, eh?

While it’s unfortunate regarding these issues and I’m not ignoring them to make one feel better. One must also take note that these issues are Tranche 2 and beyond unit related, and there is still no integration contract for Meteor. As said, unfortunate, but hardly life threatening. The delay in Meteor doesn’t really say it was because of any technical issues, it indicates because of technical issues (A/G related) and Partner Nation disagreement on training solutions and delays in agreement of an international support arrangement. Is it not?

Let’s see…

P1E was fully funded some time ago, it’s not an empty promise. One should also realise that the Drops, 1 and 2 of which are in service while 3 is under evaluation, feature elements from P1E. So make of it what you will. Again, ignoring the positive bits.

OK so rather then actually deal with what I have written reply with a vague answer about it being an expensive jet to operate.

You asserted that it nearly bankrupted the RAF, I pointed out that the report clearly stated they are work up costs that will go down to approximately the same as the other jets in the fleet and two of those other types are out of service anyway…lets look at the paragraph again:

You have been caught out selectively reading a report and ignoring the very reasons that you are wrong in that same report…now again are you going to wind your neck in or is it just an axe you have to grind?

Have you seen Spinal Tap?

Nigel: My Marshall amps goes up to 11, you see?
Man: Oh yeah, whats the purpose of that?
Nigel: Well, its one louder than 10, ain’t it!
Man: Why don’t you make 10 the top number and make that the loudest?
Nigel: Yeah but these go up to 11!
Man: Yes but, why don’t you just make 10 louder?
Nigel: …… These go up to 11…

Theres no point in explaining to some people mate.

If you want to sling **** at each other that’s fine, but you can hardly claim the high-ground whilst doing so. “Narrow-minded Argies” indeed. :rolleyes:

Hope you manage to find a sense of humour by the end of 2013.