It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Problems with the Eurofighter?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 08:25 AM
link   
that close call with the ground was attributed to pilot error - but he recovered from the close call and flew on.

im very disappointed that certain ppl have dragged this thread off topic - if you disagree with the OP then fine but don`t be a forum troll and do it in teh appropriate section.




posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 08:31 AM
link   
Harlequin,

Thanks, that's what i thought regarding the pilot ereor too.

Yeah, well we are back on topic now....there was just some speculation and differences that had to ironed out with everybody I guess and the u2u was not working so it had to be discussed on the topic page...sorry for the tangential.

Anyway, yeah that was an amazing video and I think the Uerofighter is spectacular...juts seems it is a bit of a common theme of late with computer issues on these aircraft!

Peace, Mondo


JSR

posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Natzi
Thanks for the headsup, but Hilter was a great leader that loved his people, [U]he even gave them a car that even the poorest can afford the all famous VW.[/U]


the only good thing the man ever did.



posted on Mar, 3 2007 @ 12:53 PM
link   
The article is three years old and the MoD has already said that the problems the report detailed had already been dealt with.

Look at the date,

By Andrew Gilligan, Evening Standard 24.05.04



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 01:50 AM
link   
Look to the politics.

Somewhere between BAe, EADS, Quinetec (DERA in Drag IIRR) and MOD I guarantee there is a **massive** 'policy disconnect' relative to the UKs monolithic secrecy rules and the expectations of service or acquisition bureacracies on what 'should be vs. what is'.

The only real question being whether it's deliberate.

As a function of interests and influences shifting with the rise of a sufficiently 'worthy' (profitable) alternative as is now considered 'sufficient'. Vice a powerblock backlash (out of Iraq the knives turn inwards) to make the schism worth the bloodbath in Parliament and EADS-as-NATO.

As an immediate thought, whatever chances Tranche-3 have may be best jeopardized by an attack through existing early-lot airframes with known shortcomings rather than 'implied' as an attack on the lack of maneuverability, stealth, weapons systems or whatever that -could- effect as yet unbuilt airframes. But which is always arguable as a hypothetical.

Maneuverability is pointless when you cannot beat the missiles fired from visual range and are thus primarily a BVR sniping platform. Indeed, what value maneuver when looking at a 2015-2025 scenario when laser weapons wipe airframes from the sky chock-a-block?

IMO, the likeliest variables here are as follows:

1. Money. MOD has been overbudget by tens of billions of pounds on multiple development efforts for the better part of a decade. Iraq cannot have helped.

2. JSF. If Blightey wants to act as regional distributor on the flaming Turbo-Edsel, they may have had to agree to sabotage whatever remained of the Flubbers export chances via continued production (which gets back into money, particularly unit costs vs. Saudi buys).

3. UCAVs. FOAS then FJCA was always a multilateral study and it could well be that this is seen as the key way forward into a post-JSF century whereby the right to sell airpower goes to the cheapest bid. The Brits never do things in their mil-industrial establishment without intent to vae victis vickers whore it to as many overseas elements as possible. In this case, we are probably seeing the reality that 'special relationship' access to U.S. followon NCW architectures and LO enablers has caused, relative to a rethink on the viability of Flubber as a whole vs. what 'could come next'. Of course Janes warned about this what, five years ago? So it's only in the way that it all bleeds across to the Continent that is really of interest.

CONCLUSION:
America has no friends people. Only interests. Particularly in Europe and especially in Great Britain. Forget that and they will rob you blind then charge you for the mugging.


KPl.



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 08:36 AM
link   
CONCLUSION:
America has no friends people. Only interests. Particularly in Europe and especially in Great Britain. Forget that and they will rob you blind then charge you for the mugging.


Thank you ch1466, this is probably the most succinct appraisal of the rationale behind the Joke Strike Fighter I have read.

Although I may not be in Europe/UK, I can attest to the "Blindfolds at dawn" effect that a 1st tier "special relationship ally" mentality has on common sense.

Like you and others, I guess we can only hope that sanity prevails and the F-35 Gravytrain falls into a deep pile of S$%T (which it probably will!!).

PS. An "anachronistic" Evolved F-111 will beat your UCAV any day.



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by northwolf
And the swastika isn't banned either, it's just shows poor judgement and portraits the poster as a wannabe Nazi, but that's his personal problem. Some people do get offended of stars and stripes, should it be banned too?


Good point. Attacking one type of speech endangers all others.


Originally posted by northwolf
Ps. I'm not a facist, i just hate hippocrates who ban symbols instead of concetrating on the issue.




You have voted northwolf for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more vote left for this month.



posted on Mar, 4 2007 @ 04:21 PM
link   


Although I may not be in Europe/UK, I can attest to the "Blindfolds at dawn" effect that a 1st tier "special relationship ally" mentality has on common sense.


Care to expand on this? I'd be interested to hear what you mean by this.




PS. An "anachronistic" Evolved F-111 will beat your UCAV any day.


You've been reading WAY too much Carlo...



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 04:48 AM
link   
The purpose of design EF-2000 is counter Su-27, initially being as a fighter like EF-2000 that underperform capability of dogfight is impossible.



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Natzi

Originally posted by Mondogiwa
Natzi,

Albeit that Adolf Hitler was a very intelligent manipulator of people who ruled by extreme tyranny...yes he was a great leader if you consider those things.

However, due to the unbelievably horrific atrocity that happened to the Jewish peoples, I will refrain from responding to your thread at all out of respect for the peoples that your supposed icon killed.

On top of that, Hitler was too much of a coward to kill people himself so he had others do it, maybe because he could not deal with his own lineage!?

Anyway, I assure you that many members will not respond at all or will feel similar to my above mentioned expressions. I wish I could respond, but this is blatant lack of decency for other members and their feelings.

Good luck to you, but I have a feeling that you will be changing your avatar at the least, and probably resigning up with a different username.

Remember, Hitler may have been intelligent..but the Nazi regime is a scar that Germany hates to have on its face!!!

I wish you well sir, take care, Peace...Mondo


Mondo, people in Germany love him, If somebody with power told you that, that person was evil you would believe it. Go dig up some info on his real life and come to your own conclusion, I have. He is a good role model.
I believe I can post anything that does not harm anybody example:porn , have any rudeness or explicit language.
What would you do if I put George Bush for my avatar, let me guess you would not have a problem. But he is a real Tyrant

[edit on 3-3-2007 by Natzi]


George Bush didn't cause the deaths of 60-100 million people by launching a World War, in addition to exterminating 6 million Jews, and others that he felt were subhuman. There's absolutely no comparison between Hitler and Bush. You need to study a little more history, and not parrot Nazi propaganda.



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
George Bush didn't cause the deaths of 60-100 million people by launching a World War


No, but he has caused the deaths of thousands of Iraqis...

so what is the magic number for tyrant/non-tyrant.





Anyway, enough of that, what were the problems with the EF-T that were mean to be in this thread? I haven't really seen a straight reference to any



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 09:13 AM
link   
Problems with the Eurofighter?


Please keep the responses on-topic.


Thank you.


... and we now return to, "Problems with the Eurofighter?".



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 12:18 PM
link   
Problems with the Eurofighter

Its design. That turkey is going to be useless against the new SAM systems

End of story.

And has anyone found info on what actually was done to resolve the problems?

[edit on 5-3-2007 by danwild6]



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Willard856, sorry I have taken so long to reply to your query about what I meant by this.

Originally posted by Willard856



Although I may not be in Europe/UK, I can attest to the "Blindfolds at dawn" effect that a 1st tier "special relationship ally" mentality has on common sense.


Care to expand on this? I'd be interested to hear what you mean by this.




PS. An "anachronistic" Evolved F-111 will beat your UCAV any day.


You've been reading WAY too much Carlo...


YES! I realise this is getting off topic in a way people, but to shift it to another thread would confuse the situation further. I believe my point, and by inference ch1466's, is relevant to the UK and therefore Typhoon as well.

The F-111 crack was a tongue in cheek dig at ch1466's love affair with all things UCAV. I do actually agree with many of Dr Kopp's ideas but wasn't espousing them here. Seems I went a fishin but got a different fish.


Whether you choose to use the word blindfold or blinkers doesnt really matter. My point was that like a condemned man facing the firing squad, covering your eyes wont make reality disappear. In this case we are being sold something that may not suit our needs because we trust our 'friend' the USA to act in our interests. And yet we forget that the US will look to its (manufacturing, financial and strategic) interests first, which was the thrust of ch1466's closing statement. There is nothing wrong with them doing this, all great powers act in this way, but for some bizzare reason our politicians, top brass & bureaucrats cant see it.

Since WWII the US has carefully marketed its military equipment to its allies. This was helped greatly by the inexplainable way in which great effort went into downsizing inhouse design & manufacturing in the (for example) UK, Australia and Canada of defence gear. In particular high end equipment like fighter aircraft. And who stood to benefit? Maybe this was seen as reparations for all that Lend Lease gear loaned in wartime? who knows? The point is we became captive markets, and now we have reached a point were there are less & less suitable alternatives and they all cost an astronomical amount.

How is it that a country like Sweden with 1/2 the population of Australia can produce an aircraft for IT'S needs but we can't and have to pay through the nose for whatever were offered? Not what we might actually need. While less trust worthy nations get all sorts of incentives to buy American ( which sometimes comes back to bite them on the butt ie: Iran) what is going on?

How is it that with all the trouble the UK has had over the JSF and the minefield that became Typhoon, the latest report into the future direction of Britain's defence manufacturing need's, actually said " after Hawk and Typhoon there would be no need for the UK to retain full design and manufacturing skills"?

How is it our government can ignore its own procurement rules regarding the JSF (which you have pointed out in another post), rubbish any and all criticism, and then hold its hand out for $6 billion for Super Hornets? And all because "oop's there might be a 2-3 yr gap we didnt account for because were blinded by the JSF so much". Putting aside for a moment whether or not the F-22 or any other aircraft is suitable, why did the government just accept the insult of our supposedly closest ally allegedly saying "sorry guys we love you and all but we dont trust you" when it came to asking IF the F-22 was available?

I like Americans, but I agree with ch1466 when it comes to their government and strategic interests. America has interests first and foremost, friends second.

And we seem to have blindfolds or blinkers when it comes to understanding this with our equipment purchases.

LEE.



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by thebozeian
I like Americans, but I agree with ch1466 when it comes to their government and strategic interests. America has interests first and foremost, friends second.


Yeah just like everybody else.



posted on Mar, 17 2007 @ 03:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by danwild6
Problems with the Eurofighter

Its design. That turkey is going to be useless against the new SAM systems

End of story.

And has anyone found info on what actually was done to resolve the problems?

[edit on 5-3-2007 by danwild6]


What's problem should be resolved if which has never existed?
Over thousands of posts under hundreds of threads of discussing Eurofighter's capability by comparing with other contemporary fighters has been done in other aviation or aircraft discussion boards. Every posts that attempted to attest the Eurofighter lacking air to air capability has got failure. Then those guys move to fabricate that Eurofighter lacking capability of anti-ground, the result is to defeat them with only one picture.
I suggest that to clean public street rather than vainly attempt to vilipend Eurofighter.


[edit on 17-3-2007 by emile]



posted on Mar, 19 2007 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by emile
What's problem should be resolved if which has never existed?


Well apparently some problems were discovered, so I ask again does anyone have any info on what was done to rectify the defects encountered?


Originally posted by emile
Over thousands of posts under hundreds of threads of discussing Eurofighter's capability by comparing with other contemporary fighters has been done in other aviation or aircraft discussion boards.


Well discussion boards are for discussion aren't they? Just becuase you may not like what other members are posting, doesn't mean that its an invalid topic.


Originally posted by emile
Every posts that attempted to attest the Eurofighter lacking air to air capability has got failure. Then those guys move to fabricate that Eurofighter lacking capability of anti-ground, the result is to defeat them with only one picture.


Debatable, mainly because whether the Eurofighter is successful in A2A combat won't be decided here on ATS. Hum, so you believe the Eurofighter is invulnerable to the new SAM systems being developed?


Originally posted by emile
I suggest that to clean public street rather than vainly attempt to vilipend Eurofighter.


Oh emile I thought you were above such condiscending remarks



posted on Mar, 19 2007 @ 06:18 PM
link   


I ask again does anyone have any info on what was done to rectify the defects encountered?


There's nothing much to report dan, there was a minor software glitch which was quickly rectified by correcting said software, just has happens all the time with FBW aircraft. The original story was released a couple of years ago and the issue was resolved almost immediately but the press got wind of it and made it something bigger than it really was (as usual). In contrast to this old non-story it should now be borne in mind that over 100 Typhoons are now in service across Europe and the RAF is about to form its fourth squadron on the type, 11Sqn, an ex Tornado F3 unit.

I can tell from your posts that you do not like the Typhoon. Given its excellent capability and design I'm curious where this dislike comes from?

I'm not judging you though, I myself don't like the F-18 AT ALL


[edit on 19-3-2007 by waynos]



posted on Mar, 19 2007 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
There's nothing much to report dan, there was a minor software glitch which was quickly rectified by correcting said software, just has happens all the time with FBW aircraft.


Thats it? I read that the problem was only found when a classified report was leaked.


Originally posted by waynos
The original story was released a couple of years ago and the issue was resolved almost immediately but the press got wind of it and made it something bigger than it really was (as usual).


Hum, yeah I have to say that sounds quite plausible.


Originally posted by waynos
In contrast to this old non-story it should now be borne in mind that over 100 Typhoons are now in service across Europe and the RAF is about to form its fourth squadron on the type, 11Sqn, an ex Tornado F3 unit.


Yeah well at least the thing flies
But I never thought that whatever problem was encountered that it would ground the aircraft permanently, just how it would effect the Typhoons future development.


Originally posted by waynos
I can tell from your posts that you do not like the Typhoon. Given its excellent capability and design I'm curious where this dislike comes from?


Well its nothing personal, in that its not motivated by anti-european bias. And it is a rather attractive plane, I just don't think that its going to last the next 20-25yrs. Its certainly a step up from fourth generation fighters but will that be enough to live up the Tornado's legacy?

Mind you I'm not that crazy about the Raptor either(I think the Widow should've taken the contest).


Originally posted by waynos
I'm not judging you though, I myself don't like the F-18 AT ALL


Yeah I've never liked the Falcon's ugly step sister that much myself
Oh how great it would've been had the Marines just agreed to fly the F-14, just think we could now be flying the F-24 Strike Cat or the Bobcat(thats a personal favorite of mine).



posted on Mar, 19 2007 @ 07:25 PM
link   


Mind you I'm not that crazy about the Raptor either(I think the Widow should've taken the contest).


Oh yes, without getting all techie, which I hate to do, I always preferred the YF-23 as well, although I should add that I think the looks of the Raptor have matured very well when set against the hideous cartoony appearance of the YF-22 prototypes.

As to whether the Typhoon will last the course, its going to have to, although I see your point.

When you mention the Tornado and its legacy, if I can wander a bit, I have recently been reading some Flight magazines from 1938-41 and when reading descriptions of the RAF's 'advanced' Fairey Battles and Bristol Blenheims and their capabilities and proposed operations against Germany I have to say I am reminded very much of the way we regard the Tornado and Jaguar (maybe even the F-15E too) today.

Bearing this in mind, as I progressed through to reading about the actual operations during 1940-41 I get an uneasy feeling that we might be deluding ourselves just as they were and we may one day get the same shock that they did. There is no factual basis for this, it is just that the parallel fair leaps off the page.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join