Jane’s is tipping the Typhoon to win the Japanese airforce’s next-generation fighter order.

http://www.janes.com/defence/news/jdi/jdi070321_1_n.shtml

its not tipping it to win! its probaly just there to get a good price form the US offers 😉

Wonder why the Rafale wasn’t offered or not considered if it was offered???:confused:

Cheers

Thats just a stupid error mixing up f-35 and F-22’s, You need to pick your sources better, like the USAF

Air Power Purchasing Process Continues to Improve

(Source: US Air Force; issued March 19, 2007)

(See note at bottom-Ed.)

LANGLEY AIR FORCE BASE, Va. — Air Combat Command’s award-winning acceptance team in Marietta, Ga., is setting the precedent on how the Air Force accepts airplanes.

Working alongside the manufacturer, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, during production of the F-22A Raptor, ACC’s Raptor Acceptance Team is a geographically separated unit whose mission is to provide gaining units with “ready to fight” F-22s.

“The biggest benefit is that the gaining unit receives a pre-accepted aircraft,” said Master Sgt. Timothy Silkwood, superintendent of the Raptor Acceptance Team. “Lockheed Martin can now see the aircraft from our perspective while the aircraft is being produced.”

The team consists of 15 qualified specialists who inspect the aircraft as it’s being built and accept it before delivery. By integrating into the manufacturer’s quality inspection process, only the team can give the final “OK to close” on 257 inspection areas.

“The methodology and timing of the inspections is the cornerstone of our success,” said Master Sgt. Gregory Everhart, weapons superintendent for the team.

In the past, a newly delivered aircraft was sent directly to a maintenance hangar where it was disassembled and thoroughly inspected before it was deemed mission ready, a task that lasted about 30 days.

The team identified more than 20,000 defects on the last 24 aircraft before they were delivered. Under the previous system, these repairs would have been made by the gaining unit, costing both money and time. “Military aircraft do not come with a warranty,” Sergeant Everhart said.

Without this process, new Raptors would be unusable for a minimum of 30 days. Additionally, the Air Force would incur the cost, $500,000, to coat and restore the aircraft to operational condition, Sergeant Silkwood said.

It is estimated that the Air Force will save $119 million by pre-accepting the Raptor throughout the current contractual agreement.

Cost savings and innovative thinking earned the team the 2006 Chief of Staff Team Excellence Award. The Raptor Acceptance Team was one of five teams to earn such recognition.

“All of these teams are winners and deserve to bring trophies back to their respective units,” said Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley, when he recognized the winners in September. “Undoubtedly, their innovations are helping our Air Force ensure global air, space and cyberspace dominance in the years ahead.”

The CSTEA recognizes outstanding team performance and shares best practices within the Air Force. It promotes a systematic approach for enhancing mission capability, improving operational performance, and achieving sustained results while maximizing efficiency.

“Because of CSTEA, many great ideas are generated by our Airmen working together as teams to accomplish our mission while conserving precious resources,” said Audrey Tudyk, CSTEA program manager.

According to Col. Ken Murphy, Fifth-Generation Fighter Division chief, the in-plant process template is being considered for use with the multi-service/multi-national F-35 Lightning II program.

“These extraordinary benefits have laid the groundwork for our military’s future on combat operational asset procurement,” Sergeant Everhart said. (ends)

(EDITOR’S NOTE: This article provides a remarkably candid insight into the effectiveness of the F-22 program’s quality controls.
The “more than 20,000 defects” identified before the last 24 aircraft were delivered average to more than 833 defects per aircraft, a truly remarkable figure given the low production rate.
The anticipated savings of $119 million mean that the US Air Force has paid almost $5 million to fix defects on each aircraft that has come off the production line, in addition to the $156.9 million contractual price tag.
It’s indeed a good thing that these problems are being fixed, although one wonders why they weren’t earlier in the production run.)

Sourced from http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?session=dae.25061369.1174424155.7p9dyX8AAAEAAA@jBsgAAAAR&manuel_call_cat=3&manuel_call_prod=80359&manuel_call_mod=release&modele=jdc_inter

Cheers

I was under the impression that internal fuel was about 5000kg (4995kg is often quoted).

I had a picture of the cockpit of the Typhoon (one of the DA’s) with 4996kg displayed on the fuel gauge, and got the figure confirmed by a Typhoon pilot at the Paris air show, so its 4996kg at the minimum. its as near to 5000kg as to make no difference, I suppose the temperature has an effect on the load to some degree

Cheers

First u are comparing price of Non Aesa fighter with Aesa fighter. and than both deals are signed or executed in different time frame. and there is long list of weopons with Australlian deal. we havent defined fully what system price includes. still EF price is $130m with yesterday technology.

Hmmm.. I’d expect the an announcement soon re AESA and Typhoon, BTW Its not long before the first one is flying in a Typhoon.

The Typhoon Austria deal is helpfully broken down into ‘flyaway only’ price up to ‘Full system’ price, you just need to find a reference to a similar package from the US.(look at the US Foreign military sales announcements).

If the AESA/Non AESA price variation is bothering you, then add an appropriate amount to the Flyaway cost. (Note that the CAESAR upgrade is more expensive to purchase but its cheaper over the aircrafts lifetime due to longer MTBF and less maintainence), so if your comparing Total cost of ownership rather than flyaway then deduct an appropriate amount.

Cheers

To summarize:
Typhoon’s greatest strengths are its MMI and Sensors.
Its competitive strengths are in flying performance, TWR, RCS, uptimes
Its weaknesses lay mainly in its exorbitant cost.

Overall a decent bird, but not err “2nd best after f22/JSF”
JMT.

Regards,
USS.

Hmmm re the exorbitant cost, it is costly, but all fighter aircraft are!,

You really have to compare total cost of ownership or system price, here’s the figures from the Austrian deal.

Eurofighter costs:-
Flyaway cost of each Batch 2 Typhoon is :-
EUR 62,890,000

The flyaway Cost of each Typhoon with a 9 year finance deal is :-
EUR 74,280,000

The System Cost of each Typhoon without the 9 year finance deal, and including Logistics, Training, and Simulators is :-
EUR 92,610,000

The System Cost of each Typhoon including the 9 year finance deal, and including Logistics, Training, and Simulators is :-
EUR 109,380,000

This is for 18 Typhoon jets, compare this to whats been offered to Australia (24 Super Hornets for $4.7B USD), its cheaper!!.

but you have to compare apples with apples with any other deals you have in mind.

I think its competitively priced!

Cheers