http://www.flightinternational.com/Articles/2005/06/13/Navigation/239/199178/Typhoon+hit+by+Singapore+.html

[…]

By the end of the evaluation phase, the Typhoon was, apparently, the RSAF’s favoured technical solution.

[…]

It is believed that the decision had little, if anything, to do with the Typhoon’s capability and planned capability per se, but was instead a natural reaction to what insiders called “a shambolic performance” by BAE Systems during the early part of the bidding process. It also apparently reflected Singaporean unease about the risks surrounding the advanced Tranche 2 capabilities it required.

Just picking up two typical media techniques to claim something out of the blue and then obfuscate and evade.

1. “apparently”: Was it apparently the favoured solution or was it really the favoured solution? Words like apparently, seemingly, probably, potentially are typically used to soften the author’s responsibility for what he claims. Apparently as by whose judgement? Who of the RSAF Air Force top brass favoured it? And was it the majority of people in the RSAF committee? Was there something like a cast 5:3 vote in favour of the Typhoon?
Second step of evasion would be to reply, “I can’t reveal my sources”.
“It is believed that apparently the author of this piece probably had an agenda. Sources can’t be revealed.”

2. “It is believed”: Ah, another evasion favourite of media distortion. Who is “it”? People responsible within BAE? Singaporean journalisits? British journalists? The cab driver that brought this piece’s author to the airport? His little niece?
“It” can easily be used to try and create the image of general consensus, of a strong prevalent opinion, but in fact it’s a mirage and rarely holds up to scrutiny. Smoke and mirrors.

SILVE

Please, could you provide some kind of information of how to obtain more information about SILVE?

Googling even very simple terms like “SILVE” eurofighter or “SILVE” dassault yields nothing that doesn’t point to one of your posts. As far as Google is concerned, SILVE doesn’t exist beyond your forum posts. :confused:

Could you explain please Satorian, you have lost me?:confused:

It’s a line Craig Penrice, ex-BAE Systems test pilot, drops when asked about dogfights and bravado. Something along the lines of “You don’t want to get into a dogfight. You want to shoot from a distance and then run home bravely for tea and medals.”
As Jackonicko pointed out, it seems to be a common place phrase for British fighter pilots and has been borrowed from the TV series Blackadder. Personally, I have only encountered it in a documentary on the Typhoon, were Craig Penrice talked about the jet, and in one of his postings on an Internet forum. I’m admittedly quite a fan of his. Apart from having an illustrious flying career he’s funny, witty, willing to share knowledge where possible and seems like an all-around nice bloke.

If thanks to your links 16 or RWR you can turn 180° when the other aircraft is shooting at max range at mach1,6 you have good chance to escape the missile (even greater with jamming). then it might be the hunter wich might be hunted if the first attack fail. You cannot sustain those speed for very time due to the lack of fuel.
Combat persistence is another very important factor with speed first see…

Similar to how Jackonicko sees it I would also see the kinetic loss by turning as an important factor, especially when the pursuing Typhoon in this example wouldn’t have to notch and still had half a dozen AMRAAM or Meteor left for repeat engagements.
Turning will cost you either speed or height, unless you make a really, really wide turn that wouldn’t help you at all due to the slow turn rate and would have you waste time.
And even if you make the turn, but then can’t recover quickly enough or are unable to outrun the pursuer, then you are really screwed, because a) he’s catching up and might get a launch solution despite you running and b) turning to re-engage would cost you energy again.

You launch the missile and ideally would turn smartly through 180° to run away bravely.

For tea and medals. I don’t think Mr. Penrice would appreciate you stealing his jokes. :p (Yes, I know that other forum.)

Satorian ? Could you please quote one sentence proving that a French thought that the RBE-2 has similar performance to an AESA ? That was the glitter’s point.

I didn’t write French. I wrote “Rafale cheerleaders”. Interesting how you connected them. As you might have noticed, I put the parallelism in quotation marks, trying to illustrate the logic downfall of what glitter has written about desired improvement automatically proving prior low quality and value.

Uninformed chunks boosted that IRIS-T with analoge interface is not better than the old Sidewinder. It’s true that without digital interface there’re some limitations, but for the media it was automatically “expensive IRIS-T become Sidewinder”. That’s complete nonsense. Austria will receive the same IRIS-T as anyone else.

Of course they receive the same missile, but isn’t the only thing they really benefit from the kinetic advantage of IRIS-T as compared to the Sidewinder (Which ones do they use by the way? AIM-9M?)?

I can say nobody spanked nobody.;)

What’s your source? What are the details? 🙂

RAF prepares to use Typhoon in combat

By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent

“The long-awaited Eurofighter will be flown in combat for the first time next year when it is deployed to Afghanistan, defence sources disclosed yesterday.

The first of two redesigned £80 million jets able to attack ground forces as well as enemy aircraft have been delivered to the RAF this week, The Daily Telegraph has learnt. For the next year RAF pilots will be training hard to fly the supersonic jets at speeds of up to Mach 2 at 100ft through narrow valleys as they prepare the aircraft for the war in Helmand province.

By next July, eight of the aircraft, named Typhoons, are expected to be deployed to Kandahar air base to begin supporting British and Nato troops in their fight against the Taliban.

But it has been a long and expensive acquisition, with the aircraft initially expected into service by 2000. Almost £13 billion has been spent on the Eurofighter Typhoon programme and this figure is expected to rise to £20 billion when all 232 have been delivered to the RAF.

Nevertheless, they should prove a major asset when they replace the aging Harrier squadron that has been operating successfully in Afghanistan since 2004.

Being able to achieve speeds of more than 1,500mph and carrying a probable payload of two 1,000lb, laser guided Paveway bombs, the multi-role Typhoons will be able to deliver devastating firepower.
advertisement

While the Harriers have been useful they are generally second on to the battlefield, with American jets with greater fuel capacity that are able to loiter over the ground providing the primary punch for British troops.

But by carrying extra fuel pods and with mid-air refuelling, the Typhoons, built in Britain by BAE Systems, can be stationed for several hours in the air, providing cover and support for troops during gun battles that sometimes last an entire day.

The sophisticated Sniper surveillance system will also allow pilots to view the battlefield through the eyes of ground troops, allowing them to drop bombs with pinpoint accuracy. The development means that in addition to being able to take on other fighters, the RAF Typhoons will be able to attack ground targets. The 27mm cannons will be used for the first time once ammunition can be supplied.

Wing Co Gavin Parker, officer commanding of XI Squadron, which took delivery of the latest fighters, said: “The Typhoon is already an exceptional air-to-air fighter and is demonstrating excellent potential in the air-to-surface role. It will make it a fantastic close air support machine.”

The multi-role fighter

Maximum speed: Mach 2.25 or 1,800mph
Maximum G-force: 9Gs for pilot
Rate of climb: 62,000ft per minute
Service ceiling: 65,000ft
Gun: 27mm Mauser cannon
Missiles: Sidewinder and Meteor air-to-air, Storm Shadow cruise, Brimstone anti-tank, Harpoon anti-ship.
Other weapons: Enhanced Paveway and JDAM bombs
Wingspan: 35ft
Range: 870 miles

Publishers wishing to reproduce photographs on this page should phone 44 (0) 207 931 2921 or email [email]syndication@telegraph.co.uk[/email]”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/08/warmy208.xml

Mach 2.25? 62,500 feet per minute climb rate? 65,000 feet service ceiling? What’s suddenly going on there? 😮

That’s not correct. According to the deal Austria will receive the planned block 5 examples originally intended for the customer nations. This includes 2 each from Germany and UK and 1 each from Italy and Spain. 3 Further aircraft intended for the Luftwaffe should be delivered, plus 6 used aircraft which are brought up to block 5 via R2 upgrade. But we have to as this latest deal is extremly confusing. The German government or airforce weren’t asked and that’s a variable which might quickly stop these efforts. We will see.

Ah, OK. Thank you for the clarification.

Wasn’t there also some kind of SNAFU with the IRIS-T the Austrian government still ordered with their downgraded specs as decided by themselves (no PIRATE, no Striker, no RWR threat libraries?), turning the missiles into expensive sidewinders and not being able to use their full potential?