That does not invalidate that the A/G (esp. cruise missile) layout for the Typhoon is sub optimal and makes it unable to perform long range strike as long as CFT are not integrated.

A Typhoon with 2 ALCM would barely carry 5,5 tons of fuel with a puny centerline tank, with most of its counterparts topping off with 50 to nearly 100% (Super Hornet, Rafale) more fuel. It’s completely unfit for the role.

Warn the RAF, they didnt get your memo

Ok. So, let’s put that into context:
– You are a FR or German MPA pilot flying a brand newish A320MPA
– Flying above the North sea in poor weather conditions and low ceiling. Your altitude is 20k
– you have been tasked to visually identify a bulky payload seating under tarps on the bridge of a suspected fishing trawler apparently fleeting surface forces. Your radar have pinpointed and followed the vessel since hours when your system officer seated in the roomy Airbus cabine has asserted that multi-spectral imagery would give you a good hint on what it could be hidden there. He has requested a low flyby.
– Request sent to the area commander was granted
– With the comforting perspective of being soon RTB with a mission accomplished, you and your copilot quickly agreed on the vector and speed that will position you 1NM away from the trawler at 1000ft msl
– given the never exceed speed of the airframe, max sustainable G’s, your altitude and the tactical situation, the fact that your first officer has requested a high speed descent and flyby, you will have to initiate a long straight shallow descent limited by your limited VNE. In order to achieve that, you had to fly away from the target for some minutes before turning back toward it and beginning your shallow descent. Civilians controllers had to clear the buzzy airspace hundred of kilometers around and after a bit of chatting on open airwaves and a loss of 15 minutes, you initiate your descent.
– While emerging from a hole in the cloud layer at 5000ft/330knt, you are alerted that MANPAD are fired. Your officer in charge of the powerful defensive suite built by an European consortium orders you on comms to break starboard and dive at sea level. Her voice sounds confident. The system as she used to say have been numerously tested already on C-130s flying in Afghanistan and in other place that she can’t name.
– ” break 90° right ! Nose down to sea level!” she orders
– Yanking the mini-stick on your left side, you initiate a right banking turn and a nose down input… Soon enough, the plane hits his never exceed speed and max banking angle of 30degree. You keep pushing on the stick but the systems hold the plane in its safety flight envelope.
– “Right ! Right ! Nose down !” her now screeching voice tears you ears now
– Out of the haze you can see the missiles plumes heading toward you. Two of them slowly moving off your nose in the turn at around 30degree offset from the airplane center of axis.
– the ministick is pushed full forward hitting the right corner. Your copilot hold the throttles with both hands trying frantically to eat some more knots out of the system.
– “Right! Down!” she howled again.
– That painful sound nearly killed you in advance out of frustration… *

Probably that I should link the 320 flight manual for the reader, no?

*Alternate scenario: Right before your eyes you can see the FBW pitching up firmly your nose to avoid exceeding the VNE.

Facepalm

No really. The simplified mode is not a direct access to all ctrl commands. You won’t glide a damaged 320 as easily as another platform. You won’t ditch it without fighting the computer (see crash in the Hudson River) etc etc… It’s not the right platform to start for a combat capable airframe. Unless altered. Something that won’t be done in a 6 month botched program.

The FBW “thing” is entirely irrelevant.
By the way the P8 also uses FBW to control the spoilers and the Kawasaki P1 is entirely controlled by a Fly by Light system.

are posters from f-16.net, a cesspit renowned for its xenephobia.

“f-16.net” is far from being a “cesspit”, actually there are not many places in wich we can actually find viper drivers. You might not like their opinion on your favorite kit, but their reaction is no diferent from, lets say any Russian or Chinese Forúm when the words “JSF” are written (or “Typhoon” at “Air Defense NET”, or “JF-17” at Bharat Rakshak, etc).

As I said Gripen E won the first contest much to the wailing, tearing of clothes and general gnashing of teeth from the Rafale fan brigade!

Anyway Gripen D was the type submitted for testing but the NG variant or Gripen E was the one selected which is a better performing aircraft. It also has the advantage of being able to field many of the weapons that the Hornet uses.

Pretty much correct

Nothing like the threat of having to buy US aircraft to spur Germany into action.

If the only problem was acquiring an US aircraft, they could easily order eighty or ninety Dassault Rafale´s. The thing is they have an aerospace industry, a production line, they already operate the Typhoon and whatever upgrades they have to fork the cash in order to replace the Tornado, those improvements dovetail with the MLU that the Luftwaffe will have to implement on their already acquired 140 airframes. But yes, i supose that NOT acquiring something to the “Donald” might be a priority (at least for the SPD).

somewhat sad that the most capable Typhoons will be operated by Gulf States, at least in the near future

Exact same sentence can be made by replacing the word “Typhoons” by “Eagles” and/or “Vipers”.

Cheers

Does Everybody here realize that Belgium IS buying Reaper?

No contract signed and no FMS letter till now.