Labour obviously is preparing Britain for invasion, why? because they are spineless globalist traitors who serve foreign masters. Before labour came to power there was 66 fighters to guard london alone, today there are 0. The military is under-funded, the troops are treated like crap. How much longer must the British live under these treasones scum.

Britain Prevails!

gosh he talks # - today they ordered 40 , and will order the other 44 later on bringing the UK fleet to 208

Things are getting worse and worse for HM Armed Forces. How much more cutting can they possibly do? Are there any organizations that can lobby Parliament in favor of more defense spending?

The British military has been reduced by over 100,000 personnel since 2000 alone.

The UK Ministry of Defence says its new commitment is worth around £3 billion ($4.97 billion), making each of its aircraft's unit cost about £75 million. Deliveries to the Royal Air Force will start in 2013, with the aircraft expected to feature "new radar and new weapons". They are likely to "accommodate future installation of additional fuel tanks mounted on the fuselage to greatly increase range and endurance".

well thats new - £75 mil each - compared to the much touted figure of way over £100 million - makes them cheaper than the F35

The Euro fighter isnt a great fighter plane anyway, compared to the F 22 and F35, which are a generation ahead. what's the point in these jets anyway. They were designed to fight against soviet Migs and sukhoi's. All a waste of money in this day and age.
if we want to support our troops, we'd be better with more helicopters and better equipment for the soldiers on the ground.
A Eurofighter can't do jack against the Taliban, not unless they have some Migs I havn't heard about.
They are also useless against homegrown terror, which seems to be the biggest threat to national security.

We need a dynamic government which can react to situations rather than just ploughing money into projects that take so long that by the time they are completed the hardware is out of date.

[edit on 31-7-2009 by woodwardjnr]

Well pointed our Harlequin, I'm personally quite sick of hearing ridiculous price tags for the Typhoon. For its capabilities and technology it is suprisingly good value. The F-35 on the other hand is not only poor value for money in terms of purchasing, but also increasingly unwanted by most airforces.

Jensy

I say after the afghanistan malarkey is over we should cut our military budget and make the military even smaller.We don't need it and its a waste of money that could be put to better use.Scrap trident while we are at it aswell.

Originally posted by Solomons
I say after the afghanistan malarkey is over we should cut our military budget and make the military even smaller.We don't need it and its a waste of money that could be put to better use.Scrap trident while we are at it aswell.

History has proven that we most definitely do need our military...

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
The Euro fighter isnt a great fighter plane anyway, compared to the F 22 and F35, which are a generation ahead.

Wrong. The airframes of those two aircraft are more stealthy, and it seems that comes at a price with them also being very high maintainance and ahangar queen is something we cannot afford. A plane in the sky is worth several on the ground, as you might say. Equipment wise, the Typhoon is just as modern as the F-22, having the same capabilities. The F-35 is just a prototype, when it does arrive in fighter guise it shoud be more advanced than the Typhoon, otherwise it will have been a waste of time and money, but by the same token, Typhoon will also be upgraded.

what's the point in these jets anyway. They were designed to fight against soviet Migs and sukhoi's. All a waste of money in this day and age.
if we want to support our troops, we'd be better with more helicopters and better equipment for the soldiers on the ground.
A Eurofighter can't do jack against the Taliban, not unless they have some Migs I havn't heard about.

So whats the point of the F-22 and F-35 as well in that case? The Typhoon is a swing role fighter that will also provide a survivable (in theory) A2G asset that can deliver the smart bombs so beloved of CNN during the gulf war. Tornadoes are being used against the Taliban *right now* in this role. I do agree about the equipment for troops on the ground though, shame we have to buy a replacement for Trident.

They are also useless against homegrown terror, which seems to be the biggest threat to national security.

Agreed, but we are fighting more than one war, we cannot forget the need for bombing assets, which Typhoon provides.

We need a dynamic government which can react to situations rather than just ploughing money into projects that take so long that by the time they are completed the hardware is out of date.

Loath as I am to look as if I am defending the Govt (and believe me I am!) ALL military projects take a long time to bring to fruition, it is the nature of the beast. Having said that we have been pretty 'dynamic' in the exact way you describe when you look at the RAF Reaper and Diamond operations which proceeded from request to service very rapidly to meet a need. However when you are dealing with complex and expensive systems, a long gestation is unavoidable.

Can I just clarify something? You didn't just rubbish the Typhoon in comparison to the F-35 and then call for us to be able to procure systems quickly, in the same post, did you?