Eurofighter Typhoon: It's EVEN WORSE than we thought

The Register, UK ^ | 3rd March 2011 | Lewis Page

[sukhoi-30mki]

Eurofighter Typhoon: It's EVEN WORSE than we thought

RAF gets just 107 jets – and new budget trainwreck looms

By Lewis Page

This plane is new and has just been expensively upgraded.

It will be scrapped soon.

Analysis Yesterday the UK National Audit Office published [1] a detailed report on the current status of the infamous Eurofighter combat jet – nowadays officially known as Typhoon. We here on the Reg defence desk have always had a low opinion of the cripplingly expensive, marginally useful fighter: but even we were amazed by the new facts and figures. The Eurofighter, almost unbelievably, is turning out to be even worse value for money than we had thought.

Probably the most dismal figure we are given is that the RAF will actually put into service just 107 Typhoons. At the moment it has received 70: the last of the 160 planes ordered by the UK will be delivered in 2015. But, we are told, "by 2019" all the Tranche 1 jets (which were still being delivered to the RAF at the start of 2008) will be "retired" – that is, thrown away. We'll pay for 160 jets (actually we'll pay for 2321), but we'll only ever get a fleet of 107.

This shows the acquisition cost of the Eurofighter/Typhoon in an even worse light than it had previously appeared, when an RAF fleet of 160 had been expected. It is now acknowledged that the development and production cost to the UK of Eurofighter will be £23bn with planned upgrades.

This means that we UK taxpayers will have shelled out no less than £215m for each of our 107 jets – that's $350m at today's rates, rather more than the

[Lurker]

This means that we UK taxpayers will have shelled out no less than £215m for each of our 107 jets

As long as Mrs. Abdulla Headchopper Muhamed gets to live rent free in her $2,000,000.00 council flat with her 13 kids all will be right with Britain.

[Wu]

LMAO

[killjoy]

Ah, yes. The Eurofighter. The only aircraft ever designed to surrender in mid-air.

[Hodar]

That is not a flattering picture of this aircraft. If you were to rotate the picture such that the earth were horizontal (ie. real life) the plane is climbing at a 45 degree angle - much like a DC-10, Airbus or Cessna.

If you are going to make a photo for propaganda, don’t use special effects from the 1950’s.

[wally_bert]

Nice to know that the UK has its priorities straight.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

The Volt of Jet Fighters.

[GonzoGOP]

They cut the article at a particularly bad point.

This means that we UK taxpayers will have shelled out no less than £215m for each of our 107 jets – that's $350m at today's rates, rather more than the US taxpayers have been made to pay for each of their 185 Raptor superfighters, almost all of which will be used operationally. And the Raptor has third-generation Stealth: the Eurofighter has no stealth features at all. The Raptor has thrust vectoring for unbeatable maneuverability in a dogfight: the Eurofighter doesn't.

And the Raptor is already badly over priced and can't turn with the latest Russian jets. The thing that lets the F-22 stay alive against the Sukhoi jets is stealth. The F-22's low observability, that lets is dominate the long/medium range radar and IR missile fight. Inside the furball the Russian jet's maneuverability would give it an advantage in a mark I eyeball and gun fight. And the Russain jets cost less so there will always be more of them than the F-22s they will face. From this article it looks like the Eurofighter lacks stealth to fight at range, maneuverability to fight in close and low cost to swamp the opponent with numbers. Not a good situation.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

Here's the topper.

The Raptor is a hugely more sophisticated and powerful aircraft, and is actually – astonishingly – somewhat cheaper, despite the fact that it is being made in much smaller numbers than the Eurofighter!

[Army Air Corps]

Ping.

[Snickering Hound]

Just before WWII the French built the Bloch MB-150, this "fighter" couldn't even get off the ground. It later became the Bloch MB-152 which was cut to pieces in 1940.

[fishtank]

Mr. T tells British men to "get some nuts" in Snickers ad campaign (1st ad)

Mr. T tells British men to "get some nuts" in Snickers ad campaign (2nd ad)

[Rooivalk]

The latest Russian jet, the T-50 PAK-FA, doesn't even have engines that allow it to super-cruise. F-22 does this routinely.

The T-50 is flying with out-dated engines because the Russians will not have engines to match the F-22 until 2017. The T-50 is powered by NPO Saturn Item 117S engines, derived from the supplier’s AL-31F series. The are the engines powering the Su-27.

The T-50 radar is an older model that does not have the performance to match F-22. You mention that F-22 will use its stealth features to get first-shot-first-kills on the Russian fighter. F-22 will take out the T-50 long before they realize F-22 is even in the area.

And this goes for the inferior Chinese J-20 as well. Remember, the F-22 was developed in the 1980s. America is that far ahead. Imagine what is on the drawing boards today.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

I'm not bragging or anything, just making a point;

My Nephew, who is an Air force Major, took on the flight command leader of “Top Gun” in a dogfight. The TG commander was in an F-18F (Two seater) and (At the time) Captain “P.” was in an F-15E.

Captain “P.” beat the TG commander, 3 out of 3 and the longest engagement lasted about 55 seconds. After that event, the Air Force decided that the now, Major “P.” (Andy) should be commanding a wing of Raptors. And that is one Combat Wing I would not want to be on the wrong side of!

Not even Top Gun could consider challenging them. They are in a class that no others can compare to. The Raptor is by far the greatest fighter of all time. And to think that I am responsible for getting Andy into flying, and let him fly my Super Cub from the back seat. Before that, he was afraid to fly and it took much effort to talk him into taking that first ride!

[TalonDJ]

And the Raptor is already badly over priced and can't turn with the latest Russian jets.

The Russian jets wish, in their most vivid wet dreams, that they could turn anywhere near the F-22.

[Seruzawa]

Just like the corrupt purchasing process in the US’ military-industrial complex, the Europeans waste massive amounts of taxpayer money on defense system boondoggles. Fortunately for us our enemies are even more incompetent and corrupt.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

I highly disagree. The Raptor in the right hands, will easily out maneuver any fighter the World has to offer. It is a simple fact, determined in tests against actual Russian and foreign aircraft around the World.

Nothing can out maneuver it to date.

[GonzoGOP]

The T-50 radar is an older model that does not have the performance to match F-22. You mention that F-22 will use its stealth features to get first-shot-first-kills on the Russian fighter. F-22 will take out the T-50 long before they realize F-22 is even in the area.

That was my point exactly. The F-22s stealth, supercruise and radar let it pick the range. And at anything other than point blank its opponents are toast. The SU-30MKI with canards and thrust vectoring can turn with the F-22. If an F-22 pilot gets in close his advantages of stealth and supercurise go away. In essence it becomes a fair fight. And victory in the air rests largely in not fighting fair when you don't have to.

But without stealth and supercruise there is just no reason for the F-22 to play in its environment. It is the sniper -vs- knife fighter argument. Sure you can put a bayonet on a sniper rifle, but if you have gotten close enough to use it you have already screwed up.

The Eurofighter lacks the stealth to give it immunity at long range. It lacks the supercruise to keep the range open. And it lacks the ability to turn and gun with the Russian birds it is likely to face.

[GonzoGOP]

I highly disagree. The Raptor in the right hands, will easily out maneuver any fighter the World has to offer. It is a simple fact, determined in tests against actual Russian and foreign aircraft around the World.

I'll take your word for it. However Janes stated that both aircraft were pilot endurance limited as far as their ability to pull G forces. Unless we have better suit technology, it would appear that so long as there is a human at the controls the match would be even.

Pilot training can increase G tolerance for short periods. That just brings us back to what Manfred von Richthofen said in 1917. It's not the crate but the man that matters.

[MindBender26]

An airline service Airbus or DC-10 climbing at a 45 degree angle?

You have got to be kidding!