Indeed. One often wonders if the ‘early retirement of Tranche 1 units’ plans were, or are just a committee thinking out loud with no clear view on how they were going about it. If that still is the plan, why bother looking into fitting Captor-E on the things. It doesn’t make sense. Taken this into account one can only assume the early retirement plans have been binned.

I very much doubt that the ” retirement plans have been binned”, fiting the AESA in a T1 seems an idea coming from the industry, not the RAF.

This interview has only a few weeks:

The RAF expects its later-production *Typhoons to remain in service into the 2030s. “This is a continual work to get the most out of the fleet while being as efficient as we can,” says Waterfall. The service’s current planning assumption is to maintain a so-called “departmental fleet” of around 100 operational aircraft. This will be achieved by retiring Tranche 1 examples on the grounds of supportability, and operating a baseline standard split across the Tranche 2 and Tranche 3 variants.

“I would find it quite difficult to imagine a Typhoon in the early 2020s without an e-scanned radar,” the force commander says. “It’s going to be that important a factor to drive it forward to its out-of-service date, and give it its ability to work together with F-35, because Typhoon and Lightning II are going to be married, and joined at the hip.”

https://www.flightglobal.com/fg-club/in-focus/eurofighter-typhoon/

In my opinion the number of FJ sqn´s that the RAF and RN are allowed to operate has been caped by the MOD at a maximum of nine, 7 in front line (5 Phoon´s + 2 JCA) , and another two in Training/Suport, and thats it. This means that 160 airframes are “excessive”…
Its completely idiotic, but these are the chaps who slashed the Jag/Sea Harrier/Harrier GR9A, right after those fleets had extensive and expensive upgrades, and dont forget the Tornado F3, built into the 90´s, the last one bowed out in 2011… So, entirely idiotic, and entirely normal.

Password protected link, requires registration. Find another source.

“Find another source”?!

WTF?

How old are you?!
Do i really have to ***************** google for you?
Instead of behaving like a ………., why dont you behave like a grown man and just say “oh yeah, you were right, thanks for the information”?!

Jesus Christ what a bunch of Trolls we have in this topic, between you and JSR… GOOOOSH

Okay that was March.

And from March to June Eurofighter has delivered to the RAF 40 airframes?

I meant that RB199 was designed for the Tornado and stayed largely exclusive to the Tornado (possibly because it had limited utility elsewhere). I wondered if the EJ200 project office is an entity linked exclusively to Eurofighter or if it would be simple to start offering it to other fighter projects.

On top of what Spitfire9 and Swerve mentioned the RB199 was also offered for severall projects, it lost the original competition for the Gripen, the final version of the ALR Piranha was going to be powered by an RB199, the Mirage 3000 was a twin engined RB199 concept that was discarded in favour of the M83 Mirage 4000.

Cheers

Sorry, couldn’t resist: You mean something like a J-31 with a decent engine !!! :highly_amused:

:highly_amused:

Deino, you are being very naughty (and by the way, that was bullseye)

In keeping with their compact size, if they went with a European partner then M88 makes about as much sense. Considering they already have strong American ties then it would probably make more sense to stick with the engine they already use or go with F4x4. They are aiming for a light fighter and a single F4x4/EJ200/M88 would be too little, but two of any this size would be too much. Twin engines would lead me to suspect an even lighter engine, something between F125 and M88 in size and power. By the time they do twins in that nonexistent size they could go a single F100.

I just don’t see the point in designing and building an F-35 sized or smaller air superiority aircraft. It would make more sense to buy something that is already VLO and has the features they seek, especially a mature design used by European partners.

Light Fighter? M88? F125?!

Speaking to IHS Jane, TAI F-X programme chief engineer Huseyin Yagci was quoted as saying that all three concepts feature a design optimised for low radar cross-sectional density, internal weapons bays, as well as the ability to super cruise, which all are generally associated with fifth generation fighter jets.
The two single-engine fighters possess a maximum take-off weight of between 50,000lb and 60,000lb, whereas the maximum take-off weight of the twin-engine concept measures between 60,000lb and 70,000lb, Yagci added.

http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/newstai-unveils-turkish-tf-x-fighters-preliminary-conceptual-designs

With a MTOW between 50000/60000 lbr (single engined concepts) and 60000/70000 lbr (twin engined concepts), they are aiming for something between a F/A-18C and a F-15C. In today´s world that means an F135 or uprated F414/EJ200.

I was under the impression their Typhoons were horribly bare-bones in any case.

Yep, true, but they are QRA machines; radar, radio, gun and a pair of AIM-9´s will be more than enough to do the job.

Cheers