Can nobody clip the wings of this Euro turkey? (On the Eurofighter)

Times Online ^ | July 13 2002 | Matthew Parris

[Redleg Duke]

I'm not convinced that the Osprey is a bad idea. I remember the problems the CH-47 had and it was portrayed like the Osprey is now. I suspect that once the bugs are ironed out, the Osprey will be just as successful if not more.

[ContentiousObjector]

Yeah, but unlike the Osprey the and F-14 and the Chinook eventually they stopped falling out of the sky on a regular basis. The problems we are dealing with in the Osprey today are those of air worthyness, they don't address the fact it will start grass on fire, it will suck sand into the turbines and literally make glass and oh yeah, it is virtually impossible to arm for self defense and unable to make a forced landing.

We are almost 20 years into the Osprey program and it is still a disaster, the Osprey is no closer to entering service today than it was when Cheney tried to put it out of it's misery for the first time more than a decade ago.

[LibKill]

It looks a lot like the old Mirage.

[knighthawk]

Everything you wanted to know about the Tornado but were afraid to ask

I have seen them up close, pretty massive looking (bulky). They are good planes, but with shortcomings. During the Gulf war the Tornados had to rely on Buccanneers to fly along with them in order to guide the laser-guided bombs. But the Tornado was very succesfull attacking airfeilds. Equipped with the special JP.233 dispenser, it can take out airstrips and it also drops mines to stop them from repairing the damage.

And at Bruggen (RAF base in Germany) I saw a Tornado vs. a TVR car challenge. Both stand still on thwp parallel runways and just go for it to see who has the fastest start. The TVR won the first time at another airshow, but the Tornado would have it's revenge! With full throttle it made a scramble, what a noise! The TVR was left behind easily.

It's a great strike plane, the F3-fighter variant is not and the EFA is it's follow up.

[lavaroise]

Who are the enemy? All the logic of the project used to point to the Soviet bloc.

bs, bs and bs again. With Su27-30 and Mig 29 equiped "rogue" states, the EFA is in fact too little, too late, too expensive. Even in maneuverability the JSF or the ATF are not yet up to par.

[Oztrich Boy]

OK you are right about him being an idjit, cutting a program to fewer planes rarely results in any significant savings. And part of the reason the Typhoon is turning out late and expensive as that every 5 years the Germans insisted on a review to see if it could be built simpler and cheaper. The answer was always, if you want a middlewieght aircraft able to match the Soviet heavyweight: no.

That the aircraft (now being remarketed as the “Typhoon”) looks like an airborne camel, and is one of the ugliest things seen in the sky since the first wild turkey took wing,

Guess he's never seen a F-4 Phantom II. Uglee!

But the real reason he's wrong is that just because the Soviet Empire collapsed, that doesn't end the threat of Soviet Aircraft. Not with the Russians selling Sukhoi Flankers to anyone with hard currency.

And here's where you're wrong
That said, the euro-Fighter was always a bad idea and a collossal waste of money, meant only to assuage some fragile egos by showing that they could develop a firstline fighter just like the Americans and the Russians.

It doesn't help to rely on US designs to counter the Flanker, if you find that the USA goverment has decided that certain regions: South America, Taiwan, Europe, don't get access to the latest technology (in this case the F-22, which is the only aircraft other than the Eurofighter that can match the Flanker).

Yes national pride had something to do with it. But "logically" the USN should have ordered large numbers of a carrier version of the Typhoon and avoided the F/A-18E/F "Super" Hornet

[Southack]

"But "logically" the USN should have ordered large numbers of a carrier version of the Typhoon and avoided the F/A-18E/F "Super" Hornet"

And still be waiting on deliveries of the Euro-Fighter rather than already having our F-18 in service?!

I don't think so.

[Oztrich Boy]

Well if there hadn't been a desparate need to justify the Super Hornet, F-14D Tomcat production wouldn't have been cut at 40 aircraft.

[Tijeras_Slim]

So the bureaucrats of the EU, who wish to legeslate the shape of cucumbers, are now aeronautical experts?

[rmlew]

They could simply use teh Grippen or Rafale, but that would mean admitting failure.

[wjcsux]

You are thinking of the YF-17 built by McDonnell Douglas. It eventually came back as the Navy and Marines F/A-18 Hornet. Still a sorry excuse for a combat aircraft.

[knighthawk]

They rather indeed buy it than admit failure. The F3 version of the Tornado was more or less a failure as well. But they still bought it.

The Britons are too proud to buy from France. I am too.

[Atlantic Friend]

"They could simply use teh Grippen or Rafale, but that would mean admitting failure."

That depends. The Royal Navy couldn't use the Typhoon anyway, as it was not built to operate on carriers. The same goes for the Grippen.