JackonickoThe Typhoon will give a much better exchange ratio over J-11 than Su-35, MiG-35, Rafale, Gripen, SH or F-16, whether with Captor-M or a CAESAR derivative.
Jackonicko1) Germany and Spain have stated their commitment to taking their full number of Typhoons. All partners are officially ‘committed’ to Tranche 3 (it’s not trench3) though Italy and the UK might take smaller numbers of T3 aircraft (or none at all), though that is speculation.
2) It wasn’t “Lack of committment to Tranche 3” (not Trench3 :rolleyes:) that led to the early exit from the Singaporean AF tender it was the failure to sign the Tranche 2 production contract on time, and the consequent Singaporean concern that Tranche 2 air-to-ground capabilities (EOC1/2) would not be available when required.
It certainly wasn’t due to performance issues, since Typhoon and its radar out-performed the other two competitors.
You don’t even seem to know what Tranche 3 is, you get it wrong on Singapore, you can’t spell jeopardise, and yet you pompously and erroneously insist that partner nations decisions on Tranche 3 “will definitely jeopordise its MMRCA bid.”
Tranche 3 is a production batch, not a capability or build standard. India is interested in capability, and not in how the Europeans fund their buys. India therefore doesn’t care and isn’t affected by Tranche 3, but only by capability insertions like P1E and what was until recently called P2E.
HAL produced Su-30MKIs cost more than the Irkut units because they have expensively produced, Western built avionics – giving them a higher labour cost than the Su-30s produced by Siberian peasants. That’s hardly surprising. Indian labour costs are, however, cheaper than UK and German labour costs, so Indian EFTs will cost less.
JackonickoIf, as seems likely, trench3 gets cancelled that means it’s no-longer an MMRCA contender
1) Tranche 3 won’t be cancelled. Germany and Spain are committed to it.
2) Cancellation of Tranche 3 (not trench3) would not mean that it wan’t an MMRCA contender. Aircraft could still be built for export. Indeed prices might become more keen!
EF is not serious contender just price/capability not there.
1) Price is not there? So what is the price for India when some are built by HAL? EF GmbH haven’t told me, but if they’ve told you, then let’s hear it. I’d suspect that with the local production element they’ll get them much cheaper than Austria – so we’re talking less than €61 m. Perhaps even less than the UK, which would mean less than £37 m.
2) Which capability required by India isn’t there?
The Indian deal will either come down to politics, in which case it will be F-16 or F/A-18E/F, or capability and requirement, in which case it may be Typhoon, or cost, in which case Gripen looks promising. The success of M2K in India makes Rafale a wildcard possibility, despite the fact that India doesn’t like to be a launch export customer.
Jackonickowe were having fun, and you had to spoil it.
“You wouldn’t let it lie….”:diablo: etc.
Jackonickohmmm.
And here was I, hoping against hope that there might be some news on the “extras” that would transform the operational capabilities. Extras like a helmet sight, AIM-9X integration and a working data link that allows the F-22 to contribute sensor data to the Global Information Grid. A cure for APG-77 obsolescence (and other) issues. A cheap cure for the bulkhead problem…..
Jackonicko1) There was no reduction
2) If reductions are mutually agreed between all four countries, there are no penalties.
JackonickoI had a Yom Kipper for my breakfast……..
JackonickoSferrin,
I couldn’t see anything in Dan Robinson’s interview that was remotely surprising, controversial or surprising. Like every F-22 pilot he parrots Lockmart’s “only fifth generation fighter in the world” mantra, and rightly claims the Raptor’s superiority over everything else. (He’s obviously forgetting Rafale, right?)
I thought that what he DIDN’T say in that interview and in the others I’ve read with him was generally more interesting than what he did.
I didn’t get to chat with him at Fairford, but would have liked to have probed more deeply into his throwaway comment on af.mil.
(“Among the big differences between the F-3 Tornado, which Robinson flew for the RAF, and the F-22A is the amount of data pilots are required to process in the cockpit, he said.
“There is so much information coming at you. You have to learn to take all of that information from all of the sensors,” he said.”)
and the astonishing claim on strategy page that
“In the United Kingdom, Robinson flies the F-3 Tornado – his military’s elite air-to-air fighter.
He was able to fly the Raptor in the simulator, he said, because it has wings and thrust like the aircraft he’s used to.”
Robinson is a former Tornado F3 QWI.
(I hope that they picked someone who will ‘stay in’ after his exchange tour, and not desert to the airlines or industry. He’ll be a VERY interesting chap to talk to once he’s done a Typhoon tour.)
JackonickoSerious discussions are underway over the potential purchase of the Eurofighter Typhoon by the Royal Air Force of Oman.
The negotiations are believed to be at an advanced stage……
With the greatest respect to Doug Barrie, who I think is the very best aviation journalist working in the military field today, I would say that the underlined phrases over-egg the state of the Omani discussions. I believe that we got it closer to the truth in Flight Daily.
And that’s not a claim I’d make very often……
JackonickoScorps,
Block 8 and 8B designations exist already, nothing else does.
As to what the RAF will call them, pre-P1E, who knows?
T.Mk 1 and F.Mk 2 because they don’t have CP193 (Austere A-G)
or T.Mk 3 and FGR.Mk 4 because they do have PIRATE and other Block 5 characteristics
or T.Mk 5 and FGR.Mk 6?
Certainly no-one has announced it, and the RAF wheels don’t know. I suspect that no-one has decided.
Toan
* MTBF and the logistic costs/requirements for radar?? No apology needed YET
* Beam agility and handling bi-/multi-AA/AG modes at the same time?? Beam agility is pretty good, they do some very clever things with scan patterns, and A-A/A-G interleaving is so seamless and rapid that it’s as good as simultaneous, effectively. As good as Rafale? Probably not, but good enough to meet the same requirements?
* The capability for tracking / engaging multiple targets in the wide range at same time?? Wider ‘pie slice’ in azimuth and elevation, and able to track widely spaced targets simultaneously. As good as APG-63(V)3? Who would know? Who has flown both, ‘full up’?
* The capability to against ECM and enemy fighters’ maneuver tactics for getting rid of radar’s tracking/locking?? Anyone who knows won’t tell, but ECCM likely to be a Captor strength.
* The potential of playing new tricks, such as high-speed datalink, electronic attacking modes, electronic intelligence collection, and so on?? Very little potential, here, obviously, but this stuff is all some way from service using AESA, too, and there are other ways of skinning these cats.
JackonickoToan,
WRONG!
P1E (P1 Enhancement) includes CP (Change proposal) 210.
P1E will be retrofitted to ALL T2 aircraft. It’s incorporation was to have started with Block 10, but since Block 10 no longer exists, it may or may not be coincident with Block 8B, but in view of timescales, I’d strongly suggest NOT.
Block 8B allows two-seat Tranche 2.
Block 9 exists only as a placeholder for undefined future stuff. This almost certainly means that P2E will also cease to exist.
Blocks 10 and 15 no longer exist, and all T2 and T3 aircraft will be to Block 8 standard but with a more rapid and flexible and reactive technology insertion plan.
All T2 and T3 jets have structural provision for AESA.
Most wrong of all is what you say on Captor, which though mechanically scanned is far from outdated. Techno geeks may love bright and shiny toys, warfighters care about performance and capability, and Captor M needs apologise to no-one in those areas.
JackonickoOman?
On the back page of Flight Daily News here at Farnborough today it says:
Though still the faintest of prospects, Oman is understood to be showing an unexpected ‘glimmer’ of interest in the Eurofighter Typhoon.
At first glance, Typhoon might seem to be ‘too much aeroplane’ for the small Gulf Sultanate, which currently operates one squadron of BAE Hawk 100s and 200s, two squadrons of ageing SEPECAT Jaguars, and one squadron of Lockheed Martin F-16 Block 50s.
The Royal Air Force of Oman is believed to have launched a Jaguar Replacement Programme, however, and might want to maintain its strong links with UK industry and the Royal Air Force – a long-standing co-operation dating back to the 1960s, which has seen British industry supporting the RAFO and the Sultan of Oman’s Air Force (as it was once known) and which has seen a regular flow of RAF exchange and contract pilots flying Strikemasters, Hunters, Jaguars and other aircraft types.
Now that the RAF has declared the Typhoon fully combat ready in the air-to-air and air-to-ground roles, the aircraft has the multi-role capabilities that the Sultan’s air force has always prized. The aircraft would also give Oman a real boost in air defence capability, fully able to meet any regional threat.
In this context, No.11 Squadron’s forthcoming ‘Magic Carpet’ is interesting….
JackonickoBring it On,
1) The USAF APG-63(V)3 is not an ‘already developed system’. Only six prototype sets are in use, with the ANG, for evaluation.
2) Perhaps the source specified -63(V)3 rather than -79 because he was aware of the major problems that led to the -79 failing its operational evaluation. Perhaps his direct knowledge of the radars was from that period?
3) APG-77 is not having a happy time, right now, with obsolescence issues only the tip of an iceberg, though I suspect that the Selex bloke dodn’t talk -77 because he hadn’t been exposed to it.
JackonickoOr dump two 1,000-lb bombs and carry two tanks….
Or do that and use the twin carrier developed for BL755, or copy Rafale’s sensible triple carriers……
Or look at the operational analysis and see whether 17 and 11 found the six bomb fit limiting during the recent exercises…..
JackonickoAurel,
This is just the interim, austere air-to-ground package, for use between now and the introduction of Block 10 aircraft. There are a limited suite of weapons cleared pending full A-G release with Block 10.
The weapons are: 27-mm cannon, UK 1,000-lb ‘dumb’ bomb, UK 1,000-lb Paveway II and UK 1,000-lb Enhanced Paveway II, together with an interim integration of Litening 3.
These weapons are not considered to be the be-all and end-all for CAS – plainly there is a requirement for both smaller and bigger weapons, for area weapons (CBUs and rockets), and even for stand off weapons. All of these will be provided.
But operational analysis suggested that a 1,000-lb bomb (guided and unguided) would be ‘most useful, most often’ in today’s scenarios, and thus marked the best option for this interim capability. I found it interesting that PW II was obviously preferred over PW III for the austere integration.
The point is that a full A-A load (not shown in this pic), Litening III and up to six 1,000-lb Paveways represents a formidable A-G capability and gives the lie to the idea that Typhoon is an outmoded, irrelevant Cold War bomber destroyer.
Sign In
