The Argies should have been just as p*ssed in 1982, they might have had a better result.

I admire Ckarkson. A poke in the eye to the political correct wombles.

I just wanted to make it clear that the image i posted is a real test article. Just in case anyone wants to find fault with posting an image of dummy weapons 😀

Is it an actual flight test article or is it just for static trials?

If its for flight trials then I suppose we could see such trials pretty soon, providing the £5 million funding covers that aspect also.

The record distance for a tank-to-tank kill is 5,100m and it’s held by a 120mm rifled cannon belonging to a Challenger.

In fact we seem to hold all the records for unguided distance kills at the moment. Sniper record too – 2,475m.

For a short while an Australian Sniper “unofficially” beat that British record of a shot/kill achieved at over 2,800m+ in, if I remember correctly, 2012. However this has not been officially confirmed by the Sniper, Australian Military nor the Australian Government DoD. Thus the British record still stands at the longest.

Just to note, the Royal Navy, HMS Warspite, have one of, if not the longest hit on an Italian Battleship Giulio Cesare [moving] during the Battle of Carabia of WWII at a range of in excess of 26,000 yards. However, there are sketchy reports that this record has/had already been beaten during WWII when aircraft carrier HMS Glorious was hit by the German Battleship Scharnhorst at an estimated range of 28,600 yards. However, some military analysts state the range was at approximately 26,400 yards. So that particular record seems to be pretty too close to call.

Despite the uncertainty of naval engagement range, all the Brits need now is the longest A/A hit/kill. The RAF ruffled the feathers/surprised the USAF at Red Flag 14-1 when Typhoons were claiming A/A kills much greater than was previously thought, so maybe the opportunity isn’t very far away. :dev2:

The problem is it all comes from anonymous sources, like Wikipedia. Some of it is good (e.g. most science articles on Wikipedia are good) and some of it is trash.

You do realise that anyone can edit any kind of information on Wikipedia, and that it is not the same as Wikileaks, right? Wikipedia generally is trash because of that very reason, which is why anyone in the right mind will provide another reliable source(s). The word Anonymous is something anyone doesn’t want to read/hear when one is looking for facts, also.

Ooooh scary, I’m being hounded…

Human Rights violations? Please!? Nobody was even killed, injured or captured in Crimea. Don’t make the thread political, especially when you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Every time you say “You don’t know what you’re talking about” I can’t help but think about Captor-E and CAESAR discussion or wonder about other gibberish you’ve posted, put it that way. Being bright isn’t your strong point, see above, I don’t feel threatened.

Welcome to nato Swizerland.

Well, it was either that, let them perform or sell them a couple of Mistral Class Carriers despite Russia’s Human Rights Violations naughtiness and their other shenanigans in the Crimea.

When you don’t have the huge fleet of US tankers at your disposal how are you going to do it?

Extra planning usually works out quite well especially when one has to make do with what there is available. But hey, that’s just me being picky.

5 Austrian Typhoons took part in a german-austrian A2A gunnery on Sardinia (Deci) this summer. It was the first A2A gunnery for Austrian pilots, the first training mission abroad and only the second time, Austrian Typhoons operated from an air base outside Austria (1st one was Leuchars Airshow 2013).
Infos (in german) and some really nice pictures: http://www.doppeladler.com/da/oebh/typhoons-ueber-sardinien/

It’d be interesting to learn how the Austrian Typhoons ‘fitted in’ during such exercises with them being rather limited…

The CFT on the Typhoon needs to be an incremental development. I would hope it to be integrated with that inexpensive leading edge extension at the same time. I’d be surprised if the CFT doesn’t require less work to fly straight line paths. They probably add lift, too. With the weight close to the center of gravity that alone is an improvement versus drop tanks.

With the CFTs not having flown on Typhoon yet (although I’m suspecting it’ll be very soon) there’s no information available, public or not, about how the aeroplane will perform with them fitted, even with modern days advances of aerodynamic wind tunnel testing [completed], however there’ll be quite an accurate estimation, however still those estimates might not translate well into real time flight trials. F1 teams are known to produce 1/1 scale replicas of their cars using state of the art technology and wind tunnels that show a winning formula yet in real life their product doesn’t live up to earlier expectations, put short, the final test(s) are yet to determine Typhoon’s abilities with CFTs.

Leading Edge Extensions do seem to offer a very compelling enhancement to Typhoon’s flight envelope going by what we’ve had access to already. We’ll find out by years end what advantages they’ll bring to the table. I suspect the process will start a short while after to start fitting CFTs ready for flight trials. We’ll have to see what happens.

Why would I be offended? Don’t be silly! Eeesh! 🙂