Starfighter!
In particular the Italian F-104S version, with Sparrow/Aspide missiles and one of the most powerful version of the J79, the GE-19.
Still in the 90s it could scramble and climb up to altitude in very little time.
And it just looks amazing.

Neither, it’s powered by a chemical reaction consuming onboard stores of liquid reactants.

True, that´s why it´s called a chemical laser, I guess 😀

There is also the fact that the Tornado has been developed since the late 60s, first flown in 1974 and entered service at the beginning of the 80s. It´s an old machine and there is no real replacement, in Europe as well as in USA, for such a capable platform.
I have the impression that Tornado operators, in absence of a real Tornado replacement and with the costant problem of lack of funds, try to make do with what they have/what is available: Typhoon, F-35. Moreover, I guess they also have much faith in UCAV technologies to replace, after 2020/2025, the few Tornados left in service.
Or is it wishful thinking?

As for the Typhoon, I seem to understand that it´s not as good as the Tornado as a strike/ground attack platform but it´s certainly not bad at that. Maybe it is as good as a Super Hornet in the Air-to-ground role, being at the same time superior to it in the air defence role (and let´s not forget that the Typhoo is in the same class of the Super Hornet)

How does the Typhoon compare to the Tornado?
The Tornado hasn´t been used anymore in its original cold war role of deep penetration strike, extreme low level flight, since Gulf War I.
Is the Typhoon as capable as the Tornado IDS in the use that the RAF, Luftwaffe and AMI make of it (the Tornado) today?
If I´m not wrong the Typhoon´s radar lacks the terrain following capability but this doesn´t seem to be the main doctrine anymore.
Is the Luftwaffe doing the right thing in replacing the Tornados with the Typhoons?
My personal opinion is that, with a decent range of air-to-ground precision weapons and targeting systems fully integrated in the Typhoon, this could perform extremely well in the current ground attack scenarios.
I hope that the Italian Air Force keeps its committment to all 121 Typhoons and dedicate two squadrons as Tornado replacement, the rest of the attack force being gradually taken over by the F-35 A/B (at least in the intention)

Rgds
Stefano

No prob, no intention of talking about EU.
I just wanted to argue about potential way to fill the gaps in the UK (as well as other European) armed forces in a period of hard economies.

Hello,
I think many other European Countries face problems with funding their armed forces.
I wonder when will we start to integrate our Armed Forces?
I understand that times are not mature for major Countries to relinquish their Air Defense
or Strike capabilities to a multinational command system.
Why not start from “not so sensible” assets, like training, transport, SAR and Combat SAR or
maritime surveillance.
60 years of NATO should make such an integration very straight forward, if there is the political will.
Let´s just take UK, France, Spain, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany and Italy.
Each of these Country needs between 40 to 120 trainers or 10 to 80 transports.
That´s roughly 600 trainers or 300 transport aircrafts.
By pooling up resources, they might do with a fraction of these totals, saving up huge
amount of money that could be invested in strategic and national assets (Typhoon T3b, F-35 and so on)
I understand this might sound like Science Fiction. When you prospect to the public or to the militaries
something like the European Air Force, they will most likely dismiss it as impossible
But if you prospect a European Pilot Training Program or European Air Transport Arm, it might be more feasable.
I know a common training program exists but I guess it´s still in its embryonal form and does not encompass
the full integration of the training squadrons of each Air Arm, including their assets.

If the western economies keep on struggling with their finances, I don´t see a better way to save money
and still maintain some credibility in military power.
Or we just pack up and stay home and be content with being regional powers with no global reach.

Despite being transonic, rather than bisonic, the F-11F Tiger (J65 powered) had, if I´m not wrong, a higher speed than the F-104G at low altitude, thanks to the area ruling of its fuselage.
But of course things changed at higher speeds, climb speed and acceleration.
The Tiger (and Super Tiger) were later considered a better aircraft for the Euro group who chose the F-104, being able to act either as air superiority fighter and fighter bomber (less well as nuclear strike fighter).
But at the time of choosing a fighter for the German Luftwaffe and the Euro Group (B – DK – NL – N), the doctrines of the time called for air superiority to be achieved (in Europe at least) through counter aviation deep strikes with tactical nuclear weapons.
And the Starfighter proved to be a better platform at that.
Only later, when doctrines changed, with hindsight one could have said that the Super Tiger would have been a better choice.
But history is not made with “if”