UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Eurofighter Typhoon (RAF)

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2434
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby dmereifield » 17 Sep 2016, 21:53

Are we due to receive any further typhoons? According to Wikipedia (for what its worth), we have ordered some 20 or so more air frames than have been delivered.

Given the decommissioning of the tornados in 2019, are we likely to make any further typhoon orders? Given that the F35b order seems to have been reduced to an aspiration of 48 operational, which won't be achieved until well after 2019, our total fast jet numbers are going to decrease considerably in the near future.

Appreciate any info

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 2000
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Typhoon

Postby Gabriele » 17 Sep 2016, 22:04

160, not one more. Deliveries aren't complete and won't be until at least 2018, but there was no new order, nor there will be.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2434
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby dmereifield » 18 Sep 2016, 07:58

Thanks Gabriele. So there will be a considerable reduction in fast jet numbers. Roughly how many of those 160 will be operational at any one time?

There won't be many F35bs around at that point (and even at peak their numbers will be 60 as I understand, including the training squadron, and about 24 of which will be assigned to the carriers), so will the hand full of F35bs plus the typhoons provide sufficient airframe numbers?

Lastly, what is in the pipeline (if anything) to replace the typhoons in the long term. I suppose the original plan was the F35b, but it doesn't look like we will purchase enough. Are BAE trying to get involved in a US or European project to develope something?

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 14879
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 18 Sep 2016, 09:05

dmereifield wrote: So there will be a considerable reduction in fast jet numbers. Roughly how many of those 160 will be operational at any one time?


One could paraphrase: How long will the additional two tiffie sqdrns last (flying Tranche 1 Typhoons; and further, will they be more or less just a backfill (a2a only?) to make the other squadrons available to Expeditionary Airwings? Long enough to have a meaningful F35 force in place?
- sort of a role reversal from the (not so) good old days, when the older Hurricanes could be spared in limited numbers for the Battle of France, but the few,newer Spitfires were too precious to commit to such a secondary mission

Sunday FT makes an assertation that out of the old AWACS planes the "max" effort is two on ops at any given time, which then makes a 24hr coverage a day dream (without coalition assistance)
- however their F35 assertation is that 48 would field a max of 12 at a peak of effort and only 6 on enduring basis
- I don't think that is based on anything other than the ratios applicable to older fleets (like Tornados, for which there are plenty of airframes, but e.g. no spare engines, so if one is needed it grounds another plane, assuming that pilots, uptodate helmet systems and all other kinds of necessities to succeed in missions were in place - a tall assumption!)

The thrust of the article (there are two, actually, so that not all of it needs to be attributed to a single source) is that the navy & the air force get the crown jewels whereas there is no end in sight to the hollowing out of the army's fighting capacity
- easy to agree with
- and the rationale given is that the effort and the money goes into maintaining a " shop window" of the forces as the highest tech in Europe... which in fact contributes to their fragility in high-intensity scenarios

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 2000
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Typhoon

Postby Gabriele » 18 Sep 2016, 09:27

One could paraphrase: How long will the additional two tiffie sqdrns last (flying Tranche 1 Typhoons; and further, will they be more or less just a backfill (a2a only?) to make the other squadrons available to Expeditionary Airwings? Long enough to have a meaningful F35 force in place?


The Typhoon Tranche 1 squadrons, i suspect, will only last as long as AMRAAM does, and this probably means around the middle of the 2020s. As Meteor is integrated into F-35 and as the work to build up the other 2 squadrons of F-35 begins, the 2 Tranche 1 squadrons will draw down and manpower will be shifted.
With no manpower growth, after all, there is no real way for the RAF to grow squadrons numbers. The magic number is between 8 and 10.
From 5 Typhoon squadrons + 3 Tornado now to 7 and 1 F-35B by 2020, then up to 7 + 2, then transition to 5 + 4 (OCUs excluded).
There is supposedly an ambition to put Typhoons into an 8th squadron (100 Sqn, for an "aggressor plus" role?) but i won't hold my breath on that one.

And this plan/ambition is, of course, true for as long as the current plan lasts. New cuts will change everything once again.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

topman
Member
Posts: 484
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Location: Tokelau

Re: Typhoon

Postby topman » 18 Sep 2016, 10:49

I would expect them to be there longer than 2020s, they both won't be up and running for a couple of years yet, more like 2030. However like anything, things can do change. But let them get up and running first before worrying too much about when they are going to be disbanded!

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 2000
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Typhoon

Postby Gabriele » 18 Sep 2016, 12:33

topman wrote:I would expect them to be there longer than 2020s, they both won't be up and running for a couple of years yet, more like 2030. However like anything, things can do change. But let them get up and running first before worrying too much about when they are going to be disbanded!


That would require either serious upgrades or, at a very minimum, further extension to AMRAAM in service, otherwise they will have the gun and legacy ASRAAM only...
And it would mean that F-35 purchases have been cut / delayed even further.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 14879
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 18 Sep 2016, 12:41

Gabriele wrote: they will have the gun and legacy ASRAAM only...

On a QRA you cannot use your weapons without a visual ID anyway.

If you extend AMRAAM, you don't have to extend the whole stock (which is very low, anyway).

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 2000
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Typhoon

Postby Gabriele » 18 Sep 2016, 13:49

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Gabriele wrote: they will have the gun and legacy ASRAAM only...

On a QRA you cannot use your weapons without a visual ID anyway.



Ok, that still doesn't mean it would be smart to pay for two toothless Typhoon squadrons.

As for AMRAAM, the extension will only touch the C-5 stock. The older B will be gone if it isn't already. So there is not much further room for cuts unless you want to have jets but not ammunition.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

shotleylad
Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 25 May 2015, 08:38
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby shotleylad » 18 Sep 2016, 15:10

Typhoon FGR4 in storage.

14 at Warton awaiting delivery
4 at Coningsby
5 at Shawbury

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 14879
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 18 Sep 2016, 16:11

Gabriele wrote:
ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Gabriele wrote: they will have the gun and legacy ASRAAM only...

On a QRA you cannot use your weapons without a visual ID anyway.



Ok, that still doesn't mean it would be smart to pay for two toothless Typhoon squadrons.

As for AMRAAM, the extension will only touch the C-5 stock. The older B will be gone if it isn't already. So there is not much further room for cuts unless you want to have jets but not ammunition.


All agreed, I was exaggerating ever so slightly, because
1. the two sqdrns are just a patch to warrant the manpower (being kept up) during the v long transition, and
2. the same do come in useful in UK air defence, at least with the way things stand now, and
3. also help to release the uptodate combat fleet to be sent to where ever (it might be) required

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2434
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby dmereifield » 19 Sep 2016, 20:57

Swiss seem to be after fighters again:

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... chief.html

Any chance for the Typhoon?

RetroSicotte
Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby RetroSicotte » 19 Sep 2016, 21:19

Their population voted against Gripen fighters for being "too expensive."

Gripens.

I am very intrigued to see what on earth they think is affordable to get past the population's displeasure at this point. Second hand F-16's from countries switching to F-35? M-365?

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2434
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby dmereifield » 19 Sep 2016, 21:53

Didn't know why they voted against it. Is the Government obliged to hold a referendum again on the new, proposed, purchase?

Perhaps the Scorpion might be in with a shout then???

RetroSicotte
Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby RetroSicotte » 19 Sep 2016, 22:02

They held one before, they don't HAVE to now, but going against it would be political danger, and thus unlikely.

User avatar
shark bait
Senior Member
Posts: 6104
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:18
Location: Pitcairn Island

Re: Typhoon

Postby shark bait » 19 Sep 2016, 22:03

The Swiss have referendums for everything. An interesting way of running a country, but it doesn't make Typhoon look attractive if the cheap jet was too expensive.

Its a shame, just as Typhoon is starting to mature its orders are drying up.
@LandSharkUK

User avatar
Halidon
Member
Posts: 495
Joined: 12 May 2015, 01:34
Location: United States of America

Re: Typhoon

Postby Halidon » 20 Sep 2016, 02:33

It was somewhat absurd that they passed on Gripen, but I don't know how exactly what the result means. Would the population support a cheaper fighter? A sexier one? One from a more popular country? Typhoon won't meet two of those, the remainder is very much in the eye of the beholder. Sad to say, it seems like a long shot.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2634
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15

Re: Typhoon

Postby abc123 » 20 Sep 2016, 13:30

dmereifield wrote:Swiss seem to be after fighters again:

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... chief.html

Any chance for the Typhoon?



I actually understand the decision of Swiss voters. With 34 F/A-18 in service, for a country of about 42000 km2, with no military threats at all, why buying replacement aircrafts for their F-5, when thay have enough Hornets to do the trick. One day, when replacement for Hornets is needed, I don't doubt that they will buy new aircrafts. Especially in situation when their air force ( even CRA ) is working from 8-17 h, why buying new aircrafts if even existing don't fly enough and don't make any difference after 17 h?
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

LordJim
Member
Posts: 454
Joined: 28 Apr 2016, 00:39
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby LordJim » 22 Sep 2016, 21:05

Weren't the F/A-18 mainly flown by full time pilots and the F-5s by the part timers?

RetroSicotte
Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby RetroSicotte » 28 Sep 2016, 19:49

Lockheed Martin's Sniper® Advanced Targeting Pod Continues Platform Expansion with Eurofighter Typhoon

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases ... 35623.html

Lockheed Martin has received a direct commercial sale contract for the integration of Sniper Advanced Targeting Pods (ATP) onto the Eurofighter Typhoon swing-role fighter.

The contract, signed with Eurofighter partner company Leonardo Aircraft, includes 18 pods, integration and logistics support for the Kuwait Air Force's Eurofighter Typhoon. The Eurofighter Typhoon is the ninth aircraft platform to be equipped with Sniper ATP, joining variants of the F-15, F-16, F-18, A-10, B-1, B-52, F-2 and Harrier.


---

Targeting pods may not be the most exciting news, but almost everyone uses them when they buy something, so further integration and orders surrounding it are only good things to increase the potential sales reach, and integration being complete is always good.

Kuwait is also rumoured to want the Reccelite (which is being trialed on Typhoon already) and MARTE-ER ASM (which has had ground fittings years ago) for their aircraft. Could prove to be a key customer for further integration from the Italians to broaden the platform's appeal.

User avatar
GibMariner
Senior Member
Posts: 1351
Joined: 12 May 2015, 14:17

Re: Typhoon

Postby GibMariner » 29 Sep 2016, 11:06

More on the previously reported news of Typhoons and Red Arrows visits and training exercises to Singapore, Malaysia, Japan and South Korea: http://www.raf.mod.uk/news/archive/chie ... e-29092016

RetroSicotte
Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby RetroSicotte » 29 Sep 2016, 17:44

Bahrain is apparently ending up going for 16 F-16's.

We might have just lost our chance with all this ridiculous pandering and waiting about arms sales. They were once a dead certain Typhoon pick. Even the King there was advocating it publically until all the bleeding hearts kicked up.

~UNiOnJaCk~
Member
Posts: 738
Joined: 03 May 2015, 16:19
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby ~UNiOnJaCk~ » 29 Sep 2016, 18:20

Meh. Sucks for BAE staff I’m sure. Whether we like it or not, however, many of these states are working against our national interest(s) in a variety of ways, some more subtly, and to a greater degree, than others. The day we break our dependency on them, and the wider region, is the day our national security is enhanced to a degree that no number of relatively modest arms deals could ever replicate.

RetroSicotte
Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Typhoon

Postby RetroSicotte » 29 Sep 2016, 18:32

If there were actually any hope for Typhoon orders anywhere else, I might agree.

But there isn't. Needs must et all. I'd rather the Typhoon as a national industry perform better because it directly benefits us more than anything incredibly vague downside.

User avatar
Gabriele
Senior Member
Posts: 2000
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:53
Location: Italy
Contact:

Re: Typhoon

Postby Gabriele » 29 Sep 2016, 18:38

2000 years ago romans used to say "pecunia non olet", money does not stink. Cut your relationship with those rich states, and they will just buy from someone else, and you'll have less of a lever to influence them. You lose on multiple fronts.
You might also know me as Liger30, from that great forum than MP.net was.

Arma Pacis Fulcra.
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum


Return to “Royal Air Force”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests