Phil FosterThe most bizarre myth I heard was that all Spitfires apart from the prototype ware built in the USA because the British didn’t apparently know how to build them or didn’t have the industrial base to do so. I laughed so hard I nearly paid my poll tax.
Phil
Phil FosterOkay SOC. I have been looking at your numbers and you might need to help me with the mathematics.
Using your figures and reasoning a single Typhoon costs the UK 0.006% of its total income.
Adjusting for number accuracy but using your mathematics it actually costs the UK 0.004%.
Now I am going to adjust for the total income of the four partner nations and as you can see, on the face of it that equates to approximately 0.001% of the GNP of the four partner nations but that isn’t strictly true either because the percentage of investment differs from nation to nation:
UK = ~36%
Germany = ~30%
Italy = ~ (? sorry not sure)
Spain = ~ (? sorry not sure)
So again you have to adjust the British and German contribution up a little and the others down a little. Do the Brits pay more? Of course they do but they also have a larger share of the research and manufacturing of the aircraft, the value of which I am not even going to try to quantify because quite frankly I don’t know.
So in essence the Typhoon is costing me what the F22 is costing you. Do we get a raw deal? I don’t think so. Look at what the CIA has to say about the GDP per capita of the USA. Its possibly the highest in the world and you get what you pay for. Could we afford the F22, supposing the USA would sell it to us. Maybe but I don’t think it could be justified on the cost alone and thats not taking into account the impact that such a purchase would have on the European aviation industry. When those costs are considered then no we can’t afford it.
Finally don’t write off the Typhoon, the people who designed and built it deserve more credit than you give them.
Phil 🙂
Phil FosterSOC is just pissed because some @#$@$^@sisi equates do nothing as being morally superior…
irregardless of GDP or GNP or whatever…the point is…so what? We do what we do with our money and it’s none of your !$#%!$ business. Don’t even bother with treasury bonds and other crap, it is still our money. When we ask NATO nations to beef up your military capabilities so you don’t have to come beg us about some stupid places not too far east of France…why then don’t you say, “geeze, why you guys spend so much on defense”. As to the reverse, we ask the Europeans to beef up, yet nothing happens. Seems like Europeans don’t listen to us either. So, what’s the big point about multilateralism besides being just mere lip services? That i can let go and agree to disagree. But this #$^@$%sisi equates it to moral superiority? 😡
If tomorrow Americans decide to double our defense funding or cut it to zero, that’s our business…we don’t say hey France why don’t you stop making that redundant Rafale and go buy the Eurofighter…that’s your money so it’s none of our business.
Ah the constructive art of name calling. My budget is bigger than your budget etc etc.
Phil FosterPer Capita vs. Overall GNP (in USD)
UK: 21,410/1,264,300,000,000
Germany: 26,570/2,179,800,000,000
Italy: 20,090/1,157,000,000,000
Spain: 14,100/555,200,000,00062 million Euro for an EF-2000, or 84 million USD.
The F/A-22 is sitting right now at 28,700,000,000 for program cost, and the budget office thinks this equates to 218 F/A-22s, or 132 million per jet. The USAF thinks they’ll be able to squeeze closer to 270 or so out of that money, but I think they’ll have to make use of the removal of the spending cap to get more jets. As for 65.5 billion for the program, I’ll have to look into that, the figure I saw was 28.7 billion. Either way, if the cost doubles, that still equates to a 0.002% ratio, still less than the four Europartners.
Well I don’t want to be picky but your figures are way off the mark because as of 2004 GDP per capita for the UK in USD is $27,700 and not the $21,410 that you quoted. Total income was approx $1.7 trillion and not the $1.3 trillion that you quoted. So that puts the UK figure, if you are right which it is becoming increasingly evident that you are not at 0.0046 and not 0.006 that you quoted for a single Typhoon.
Follow this link:
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/uk.html#Econ
Then of course you have to take into account that the entire Typhoon programme is being funded by the taxpayers of four European nations. I am assuming that your figures for them are incorrect as well so lets see:
Italy. Hmm. You quoted $20,090 when in fact it is $26,700 with a total income of $1.55 trillion.
Spain. You quote $14,100 when it is in fact $22,000 with an income of approx $886 billion.
Germany. You quote $26,570 when it is in fact $27,600 with a total income of $2.271 trillion (don’t forget, Germany’s population is significantly bigger than the UK.
So lets add that up. The total income of the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain is approx $6.4 trillion compared to the USA’s $11 trillion. You do not use each individual nations income to work out the cost of a single aircraft you use the the total income of the participating nations, otherwise co-operation is meaningless.
Phil
Phil FosterNot sure what your slant is mate. What would the cost of a single F/A-22 be to say the UK GNP? I think it would be a lot more than the 0.006% that the Typhoon is costing assuming your numbers are correct (I am not saying they are not BTW.) If this is correct then although the F22 may be a great buy for the US tax payer it wouldn’t be for the UK tax payer.
Can I have the numbers you used to work out those figures I’m a little bit rusty on GNP these days? I know UK and German GDP per capita is very similar and Germany has a much larger population so your figures look okay to me at first glance.
Thanks
Phil
Phil FosterInfinity is TECHNICALLY the largest number possible. And not infinity plus one or anything because you cannot put a definite on a possible.
Barnowl’s A level maths doing girlfriend.
But infinity is also, technically, the smallest number as well.
Phil
Phil FosterOne word post.
WOW!
Okay so its not actually a word but that is a very nice peice of artwork.
Phil FosterOh dear. Looks like I am reinstalling FS9 then. I wonder if PF will take a back seat for a while.
Phil FosterYes but not the political will.
phil
Phil FosterIts a matter of preference and marketing. There is a bit of politics involved as well. Mate there is nothing wrong with the EF it is just that those who rally against it are the ones most likely to loose out as it goes into production. For instance Dassault think the EF is a pile of old sweaty knickers but what do you expect from one of the EFs competitor manufacturers. Learn not to care young Padawan learner the EF is on it way and it is a very good machine that will, given the political will, do exactly what it says on the tin.
phil
Phil FosterThe enemy doesn’t care. They want every ‘Infidel’ dead anyway. And if they get killed in the process they achieve Martyrdom.
Cannot disagree with this but you said it in a nut shell. Radical ‘so-called Muslims’ (I am not a Muslim by the way but people who specify that non muslim children are legitimate targets cannot in anyway be called spiritual, let alone Muslim or even human) want all non Muslims dead, anywhere, anytime. That means you, me, Christians, Pagans, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, 7th day adventists and even liberal Muslims who just want to get on with their lives (99% of the Muslim population) because they dare to disagree. So basically nobody is safe and like it or not they have to be confronted.
As I get older I tend to question my interest in military matters and I do so even more when I see kids being pulled out of bomb damaged buildings and wonder how many did not make it out alive. However I also know that when these ‘people’ hear about western kids caught up in bomb blasts and airline hijackings and flown into the sides of buildings they feel no regret, no remorse, nothing. Except of course a sense of victory. That child is just another non Muslim dead and they see this as a result. Its what they want for all of us and this MUST be confronted and dealt with. My only regret is that the US has so little support because GWB is calling the shots and they don’t like him or trust him. Neither do I and I don’t trust Blair either but come the next election what real choices do we have? The Conservatives will only alienate their own people and the Liberals will sell the UK to the Europeans. UKIP are an unknown quantity but we will have to wait and see.
The truth is that whoever we get they are still going to have to confront terrorists and they will have to do it for the long term. This thing won’t be over even after most of us are dead and buried so I have to ask myself this question. Do we fight them at home or abroad?
🙁
Phil FosterBecause it’s better out than in. 😉
Phil, well done. Next step is to get different notes out of it.
I can trump ‘Over the hills and far away’ haven’t worked out how to sing it at the same time though. Takes a lot of effort you know.
Phil
🙂
Phil FosterThunder and Lightnings by Jan Mark.
Cracking book. I wonder if it would feel the same reading it again so many years after reading it.
Phil 🙂
Phil FosterNo longer in service. Otherwise we’d have to consider Australia, the Netherlands, Canada, and some others as well 😀
Blimey I didn’t know that.
Phil
Phil FosterOff the top of my head we have……
Britain with the Invincible,Illustrious and Ark Royal,their airwings consist of Sea Harrier FA2’s,Harrier GR.7’s and various marques of Sea King.
Russia,which has the Kuznetzov that carries an airwing of SU-33 navalized Flankers and various helicopters (ie. Ka27, Ka29 and Ka31)
France,which has the Charles De Gaulle,the airwing consisting of Rafales, Super Etendard Modernise’s ,E2 Hawkeyes and various naval helicopters (I for get which ones :confused: ).
Spain has the Harrier carrier Principe de Asturias,carrying an air wing of 22 aircraft normally, made up of a mix of Harrier AV-8B+’s and SH-3’s and AB 212’s
Italy has again,a Harrier Carrier called the Giuseppe Garibaldi which they class as a cruiser. It’s airwing’s a mix of Harrier AV-8B+’s again along with EH-101’s, SH-3’s and AB-212’s
Thailand is another user of Principe de Austrias class carrier,in the form of the Chakri Naruebet, bought from Spain in 1997. The airwing’s a mix of navalized AV-8A’s and S-70 Seahawks.
And finally, we have Brazil,which has the former French navy Carrier Foch bought in 2001 and brought into service as the Sao Paulo,carrying an airwing of former Kuwaiti Air Force A-4KU Skyhawks alongside SH-3 Sea Kings
Hope this answers your question (and that I’ve not missed out too much detail)
Cheers.
Argentina? 25th May?
Sign In
