Eurofighter Cost At 20 billion pounds and growing

[Giblets46]

Will be interested to see what happens if the CAESAR radar is added to the Typhoon for Tranche 2 (for any customers), it is due to be tested in a Typhoon this autumn (fall). I can see the Saudi's opting for it, and any other export customers, as well as possibly the RAF.
As it was, the singaporeans were supposedly very impressed with the Captors range/ performance.

 

[DarthAmerica]

Will be interested to see what happens if the CAESAR radar is added to the Typhoon for Tranche 2 (for any customers), it is due to be tested in a Typhoon this autumn (fall). I can see the Saudi's opting for it, and any other export customers, as well as possibly the RAF.
As it was, the singaporeans were supposedly very impressed with the Captors range/ performance.

CAESAR is still in development and wont be available before 2011 or so. But because its a retrofit there isnt any reason why a customer could'nt order it as an option to be added on when its available.

 

[DarthAmerica]

Typhoon's radar is still very good at all and AESA alone will not make an F-16 or F/A-18E a much better or superior fighter compared to the Eurofighter. AA combat depends on much more factors than stealth and radar technology only. Super sonic performance, passive target detection, tracking and identification are as important as self defence systems, SA and weapons.

For radar systems the future definitely belongs to the AESA technology, which is without doubt far superior to MSA in capabilities and performance. But what does it mean for a F/A-18E or F-16E VS Eurofighter scenario? The Eurofighter will be able to detect and track the opposite at the same or larger distance. And as mentioned often enough AESA technology in Europe is more advanced than you might think. CAESAR was realized within 3 years ad is only the beginning.

This(above) statement is both false and contradictory. Perhaps you would like to rewrite it in case you are being misunderstood. Otherwise it doesnt make logical sense.

Specify what's inccorrect in my comment! I have no doubt the F-22 being superior in AA combat to the Typhoon, but as mentioned at twice the cost and with flexibility. Compare current platform configurations or future ones, but don't compare Eurofighter now with the F-22 in a 2010 configuration.
In terms of flexibility the Raptor will dramatically reduce its stealth capabilities if carrying external stores. Further more how much different AG weapons will be integrated into the Raptor and what tasks can fullfilled with Block 20 or 30?

Full stealth features arent necessary after the first stages of the conflict. Also with external stores the Raptor will still have considerable survivability advantages over legacy aircraft when carrying external stores.

Back it up with some facts and data.

When is the last time a Typhoon landed on a carrier, acted as a Tanker, had a dedicated EW variant, could carry all USN ordinance, deliver JDAM to multiple targets or in the standard versions conduct Information Warfare or electronic attack?

More experience doesn't mean Europe has no compareable capabilities. You seem to forget or not know about the experiences Europe has made. We were also fighting along with you in Iraq, Afghanistan or Kosovo for example...
But honestly I don't care what you think about Europes capabilities in that direction.

You should, I've been witness to and participant in. But thats up to you.

So come on prove it. What makes an F-16 Blk 60 superior and don't limit to the radar only.

That would be a category error if we are talking about modern combat aircraft.

 

[Scorpion82]

This(above) statement is both false and contradictory.

And again you say nothing. Guy come in begin to specify your statements. I can reject on this senseless bla bla.

Full stealth features arent necessary after the first stages of the conflict. Also with external stores the Raptor will still have considerable survivability advantages over legacy aircraft when carrying external stores.

Right but it doesn't improve the flexibilty at all. But that's no reason to worry about at all as the Raptor wasn't designed as a multirole fighter.

When is the last time a Typhoon landed on a carrier, acted as a Tanker, had a dedicated EW variant, could carry all USN ordinance, deliver JDAM to multiple targets or in the standard versions conduct Information Warfare or electronic attack?

So and what exactly makes the SH more survivable? The things you are claiming have nothing to do with the topic. It's the usual bla bla meaning nothing.

That would be a category error if we are talking about modern combat aircraft.

Please clarify that. At first you allege F-16 blk 60 is superior and now you are coming up with that. Do you even know what you are talking about?

 

[Giblets46]

CAESAR is still in development and wont be available before 2011 or so. But because its a retrofit there isnt any reason why a customer could'nt order it as an option to be added on when its available.

According to the manufacturers:
"The Eurofighter partner firm source said CAESAR, which could be test flown on a Eurofighter this year, would require “only a few hours” of work for retrofitting, swapping out the antenna and the power supply."

"Having been fully integrated and tested on the ground, the CAESAR system is currently on loan to the CECAR evaluation program,” "

This would demonstarte that, although the partner nations have not included it in their own purchases it will be ready for use far earlier.

The ECR-90 was always designed to have the AESA radar later, so fitting it will be far easier than other conversions.

 

[DarthAmerica]

According to the manufacturers:
"The Eurofighter partner firm source said CAESAR, which could be test flown on a Eurofighter this year, would require “only a few hours” of work for retrofitting, swapping out the antenna and the power supply."

"Having been fully integrated and tested on the ground, the CAESAR system is currently on loan to the CECAR evaluation program,” "

This would demonstarte that, although the partner nations have not included it in their own purchases it will be ready for use far earlier.

The ECR-90 was always designed to have the AESA radar later, so fitting it will be far easier than other conversions.

What you are reading about is the demonstration unit not a production unit. Its a little different and much much more costly. I have worked with prototypes and preproduction units and there is a difference between what it cost to make the demonstrator and what it cost to mass produce. When the CAESAR reaches production status sometime after 2010 then yes, it will take only small efforts to retrofit. 2010+ isnt that far away anyway. As a historical reference for how long these processes take. Look at the APG-79 which will reach operational status near the end of this year.

http://www.raytheon.com/products/apg79aesa/

A lot of things took place between 2000-2006. It would be highly optimistic and unlikely for CAESAR to be available anytime before 2011 and thats still pushing it considering this is a first for European Defense Aviation. But if they meet or beat that timeframe then great! I have seen nothing that indicates that will.

When CAESAR does arrive though and assuming it works properly it will be a huge monkey off of the back of the Typhoon. The unfortunate thing is that in that timeframe the F-35 will be on the market in force at half the price.

 

[DarthAmerica]

And again you say nothing. Guy come in begin to specify your statements. I can reject on this senseless bla bla.



Right but it doesn't improve the flexibilty at all. But that's no reason to worry about at all as the Raptor wasn't designed as a multirole fighter.



So and what exactly makes the SH more survivable? The things you are claiming have nothing to do with the topic. It's the usual bla bla meaning nothing.



Please clarify that. At first you allege F-16 blk 60 is superior and now you are coming up with that. Do you even know what you are talking about?

Your post are unnecessarily confrontational in a forum that IMV is somewhat biased. e.g. I've made similar comments toward others and the Mods edited them out. I personally like arguement and could care less about how we talk so long as I am able to respond in kind which is not the case here. If you would like to discuss this then I would ask if you could make an effort to control the sarcasm and any form of personal references about what I know or dont know. Our post speak for themselves about knowledge and I'm confident with what I've already said to you. If you still have questions then feel free to ask but do so in a way more akin to dialogue rather than arguement. And if you could limit yourself to one ot two questions at a time that would make the discussion flow better and prevent digressions.

Thanks
DA

 

[Scorpion82]

The unfortunate thing is that in that timeframe the F-35 will be on the market in force at half the price.

And if Mr. president say the Iraq has nukes you believe him right? Sorry Darth but you are to naive! The F-35 is already much more expensive than exspected and be sure it will not cost the half of a Eurofighter! Already now the F-35 has reached an 54-61 million $ system price and I'm sure we'll see even further increases. So already now F-35 is not much cheaper than a Typhoon and in the long term I would not count on the F-35 as a low cost fighter.

 

[Scorpion82]

Your post are unnecessarily confrontational in a forum that IMV is somewhat biased. If you would like to discuss this then I would ask if you could make an effort to control the sarcasm and any form of personal references about what I know or dont know. Our post speak for themselves about knowledge and I'm confident with what I've already said to you. If you still have questions then feel free to ask but do so in a way more akin to dialogue rather than arguement. And if you could limit yourself to one ot two questions at a time that would make the discussion flow better and prevent digressions.

Thanks
DA

It's up to us both. Simply suggest an area where to start and then we can do it. In fact I asked you exactly 2 questions within the last post, is that to much for you?
You are running circles saying nothing and that starts to bore me. Start a serious discussion bringing up some fatcs and data or let it. But safe your and my time if you aren't able/or don't want to do that. You avoid nearly every specific question of mine and counter it with your vacuousness statements.

 

[Giblets46]

I would suggest that the CAESAR is more like the APG-63 upgrade than the entirely new APG-79, with the added bonus that it was always intended to have the AESA upgrade.

In terms of the time span, now that industry has chosen to take the lead in order to improve their export prospects instead of waiting for the governments funding i think we will see production versions far earlier, (take a look how quickly they ironed out problems with the Tornado F3 as soon as they got an export customer for it!)

 

[JWCook]

Hi Scorpion

The CEASAR program was privatley funded by Selex Sensors and Airborne Systems as they saw an opportunity to include it in the Saudi deal...

This infers that a production radar would be available long before 2011.


Cheers

 

[DarthAmerica]

I would suggest that the CAESAR is more like the APG-63 upgrade than the entirely new APG-79, with the added bonus that it was always intended to have the AESA upgrade.

In terms of the time span, now that industry has chosen to take the lead in order to improve their export prospects instead of waiting for the governments funding i think we will see production versions far earlier, (take a look how quickly they ironed out problems with the Tornado F3 as soon as they got an export customer for it!)

That's certainly plausible. There is a huge incentive to sell the Eurofighter and the three most damaging lack of features has been timeliness of delivery, multirole capability and AESA. There are considerable efforts to address all these issues. The question is how soon. IMV, and this is speculation to an extent, how fast can the production facilities be brought online? How much will it cost? These are determined by demand and market forces. I would say that most of the technological hurdles have been jumped in regard to performance. Keep in mind CAESAR is more akin to a bigger APG-80 due to its than it is a APG-63(V2)/APG-63(V3)/77/79/81. This is also in the interest of time. But then that leads to another speculative question. How limited will export APG-81 or potentially APG-79 be? If they arent downgraded then CAESAR will have some serious disadvantages. Some possibly offset by customer requirements. But diadvantages none the less. I wonder what a CAESAR successor would be like. I guess we may have to see what types of radars end up on the various Euro UAV/UCAVs because I think Europe may not pursue indigeonous manned fighter technology past the 4th Gen Typhoon/Rafale/Gripen.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I've been monitoring this discussion, but until now, have refrained from posting.

Several things are clear to me.

Darth, you are making numerous arguments against the capability provided by Typhoon.

Arguments that Singapore and Sth Korea didn't choose it and thus obviously it lacks capability compared to Teen series are specious and show a disregard for the realities of these respective competitions. The F-15 also beat out Rafale, Super Hornets, SU-27/30, evolved MiG-29, F-16 and Mirage variants.

The Typhoon AND Rafale similarly beat the Teen series fighters (with the sole exception of F-15) AND Russian fighters in the short listing process. That they are well informed customers is a fact that you use in your arguments against Typhoon, but then overlook the fact that it beat ALL these others types, even in Tranche 1 configuration.

If a Tranche II or III Typhoon could have been offered it may have been a very different story. The fact is that Typhoon is an aircraft at the very EARLY stages of it's development.

You boast about the capability of F-15/16/18 series fighters but ignore the fact that they've all had 20 years+ development SINCE they entered operational service. Typhoon has only JUST entered service.

Do you seriously think Spain and Italy, which ARE operators of advanced "legacy" F/A-16/18 series fighters, would have opted for Eurofighter if it DIDN'T offer greater capability now as well as through it's development?

The truth is that Eurofighter will become an amazingly capable aircraft. Germany has already conducted "heavy load" testing with 4x 2000lbs Enhanced Paveway II GBU-10, 3x AMRAAM and 3x drop tanks and 2x IRIS-T carried last month.

Spain is also currently conducting IRIS-T integration as we speak (type) and they will be operational in 2007.

F-35A and F-22 MAY exceed it, but nothing else on earth is likely too.

 

[DarthAmerica]

Darth, you are making numerous arguments against the capability provided by Typhoon.

Arguments that Singapore and Sth Korea didn't choose it and thus obviously it lacks capability compared to Teen series are specious and show a disregard for the realities of these respective competitions. The F-15 also beat out Rafale, Super Hornets, SU-27/30, evolved MiG-29, F-16 and Mirage variants.

There is nothing specious about my arguement. You are welcome to challenge any aspect of my arguement. Many others tried that before each of these competitions and ALL were shown to be wrong. Also the last sentence is completely out of context and divorced from anything posted by me.

The Typhoon AND Rafale similarly beat the Teen series fighters (with the sole exception of F-15) AND Russian fighters in the short listing process. That they are well informed customers is a fact that you use in your arguments against Typhoon, but then overlook the fact that it beat ALL these others types, even in Tranche 1 configuration

Thats absolutely false on a number of levels to include the fact that the F-16 has also been selected more than once as a preference to the Eurofighter.

If a Tranche II or III Typhoon could have been offered it may have been a very different story. The fact is that Typhoon is an aircraft at the very EARLY stages of it's development.

"If" and "Will Be" are common themes surrounding the EUrofighter. An aircraft with origins that date back to the 1970's. The thing is Tranche II was offered and Tranche III is only a paper airplane at this point.

You boast about the capability of F-15/16/18 series fighters but ignore the fact that they've all had 20 years+ development SINCE they entered operational service. Typhoon has only JUST entered service.

Yes, about a Decade or more late. Thats part of the problem and one of the criticisms that I made originally.

Do you seriously think Spain and Italy, which ARE operators of advanced "legacy" F/A-16/18 series fighters, would have opted for Eurofighter if it DIDN'T offer greater capability now as well as through it's development?

I dont just think it, I know it and have proved it. But I undersand the political, economic and industrial reasoning behind the choice which is sound logic and I also stated that.

The truth is that Eurofighter will become an amazingly capable aircraft. Germany has already conducted "heavy load" testing with 4x 2000lbs Enhanced Paveway II GBU-10, 3x AMRAAM and 3x drop tanks and 2x IRIS-T carried last month.

Spain is also currently conducting IRIS-T integration as we speak (type) and they will be operational in 2007.

F-35A and F-22 MAY exceed it, but nothing else on earth is likely too.

Another "Will Be". Thats not the truth either. The truth is that EVERY ONE of the latest Teen evolutions by far exceed the Typhoons current or proposed capabilities. the F-22/35 are simply on an entirely different level altogether such that its not practical to compare them.

I have no doubt that the Eurofighter will eventually be a world class 4th Generation fighter and be competitive against most of the threats it would face. At best it will rival the latest Rafale/Gripen/Mig-35/F-16 blks as those platforms are its nearest competitors. But once you get to the F-15's, F/A-18E, F-22/35 and evolved SU-27's the Eurofighter will be soundly outclassed all things considered.

 

[Big-E]

I'm actually suprised that the best thing EU countries can come up with is the Typhoon, I would have thought they would go 5th gen... I would rather fly a Super Hornet against a Typhoon and it's almost half the price!

 

[DarthAmerica]

The truth is that Eurofighter will become an amazingly capable aircraft. Germany has already conducted "heavy load" testing with 4x 2000lbs Enhanced Paveway II GBU-10, 3x AMRAAM and 3x drop tanks and 2x IRIS-T carried last month.

Truth is the F-15 has been fighting wars with similar or greater loads for about 20 years now.

Operation Desert Storm circa 1991:

http://www.f-15estrikeeagle.com/weapons/loadouts/graphics/ods_01.gif

Today, each weapon could be aimed at different widely spaced targets:

http://www.chinalakealumni.org/IMAGES/2002/87-0180 F-15E 30APR02 USAF 020507-52.jpg

The Super Hornet could do this the netcentric way:

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2006/q2/060418b_nr.html



Forgot to mention this. But I dont recall reading the presence of a litening pod so that bomb laden Typhoon wouldnt even be able to deliver the payload without a second aircraft or somebody on the ground painting the target all while within the lethal engagement envelope of point defenses and assuming weather or battlefield conditions permit the use of LGB's.

 

[DarthAmerica]

I'm actually suprised that the best thing EU countries can come up with is the Typhoon, I would have thought they would go 5th gen... I would rather fly a Super Hornet against a Typhoon and it's almost half the price!

I think had the Cold War not ended so abruptly the Eurofighter would have been in service about a decade earlier which would have made it a nice competitor to the pre blk 60 F-16 and F/A-18C. But rather than scrapping the program when it was no longer relevant the political and economic interest took over and here we are a decade later with a fighter that still cant do the things and F-16/18 could in the late 1990's to sa nothing of the evolved variants.

The EU would very much liked to have been able to produce a European 5th Generation Fighter(Using the common public perception of aircraft generation classification) but technological and financial limitations being what they are they bought into American F-35's to fill that niche.

 

[Aussie Digger]

There is nothing specious about my arguement. You are welcome to challenge any aspect of my arguement. Many others tried that before each of these competitions and ALL were shown to be wrong. Also the last sentence is completely out of context and divorced from anything posted by me.



Thats absolutely false on a number of levels to include the fact that the F-16 has also been selected more than once as a preference to the Eurofighter.



"If" and "Will Be" are common themes surrounding the EUrofighter. An aircraft with origins that date back to the 1970's. The thing is Tranche II was offered and Tranche III is only a paper airplane at this point.




Yes, about a Decade or more late. Thats part of the problem and one of the criticisms that I made originally.



I dont just think it, I know it and have proved it. But I undersand the political, economic and industrial reasoning behind the choice which is sound logic and I also stated that.



Another "Will Be". Thats not the truth either. The truth is that EVERY ONE of the latest Teen evolutions by far exceed the Typhoons current or proposed capabilities. the F-22/35 are simply on an entirely different level altogether such that its not practical to compare them.

I have no doubt that the Eurofighter will eventually be a world class 4th Generation fighter and be competitive against most of the threats it would face. At best it will rival the latest Rafale/Gripen/Mig-35/F-16 blks as those platforms are its nearest competitors. But once you get to the F-15's, F/A-18E, F-22/35 and evolved SU-27's the Eurofighter will be soundly outclassed all things considered.

You have proven nothing. Your statements have been contradictory, to try and suit the comments made by other knowledgeable posters. State WHY you know something or HOW, or else why bother trying to convince us? Where have YOU obtained this knowledge from? The sources you have provided to date, have in the main, contradicted your OWN arguments.


I specifically discussed the selection of Eurofighter, Rafale and F-15 in both Korea AND Singapore because of the number of times YOU quoted it as evidence in this discussion. In each OF THESE cases evolved teen series fighters (besides F-15) HAVE contested against Eurofighter and HAVE NOT been shortlisted.

As to your F-16 comments, can you explain which Country has chosen F-16 OVER Eurofighter in a "fly off" competition? Eurofighter BEAT F-16 in Austria even when cheap second-hand variants were available. Perhaps the UAE chose F-16 over Eurofighter in a new competition, (though I can't find a source to this effect) and I can't think of anyone else who might have.

Greece has recently announced it intends to restart it's Eurofighter acquisition instead of itaking up it's additional F-16 options and Saudi Arabia has recently announced Typhoon over further F-15 buys.

As to the F-15E loadouts (I hope you aren't referring to F-15C's, you never made that clear though). The Eurofighter recently carried 5x AAM's, 3x drop tanks and 4x 2000lbs GBU's (3x BVR, as opposed to the WVR only missiles on that diagram), plus it will carry Litening III targetting pods once integrated. A considerably greater load than that displayed on the diagram you provided.

As to Typhoon continues to develop so will it's capabilities. You refer to it's inferior range but compare the clean aircraft to teen series fighters fitted with CFT's, ignoring in the process that the Typhoon program has these under development, along with greater thrust to maintain it's agility (that the Teen fighters have benefitted from).

I accept it has a delayed development, but then so has the Super Hornet, the F-22 and so most likely will F-35A . It is increasingly rare for a modern defence project NOT to be delayed. This is the basis for me calling your arguments specious.

Platforms you compare capabilities with have had the same problems, yet you ignore them and only criticise Typhoon (in these discussions). "If "and "will be" are the exact same issues surrounding F-22, JSF, Rafale and mostly SH, yet you have not criticised ANY of these aircraft to nearly the same degree, glossing over any problems they have encountered.


You lambast the Typhoon and state "it's not even on the same level as F-22" yet ignore that due to cost overruns and development problems, virtually ALL A2G capability has been stripped from F-22, leaving it unable to fill most air combat tasks. Previously planned upgrades to restore these capabilities have been cancelled in favour of an additional 4 airframes and an extended production run.

Give the Typhoon a quarter of the development period the teen fighters have had, when it hits full operational capability and then you'll have a reason to criticise if not up to speed. By 2012, the full Block II capability will be in place, AIM-9L/M, AMRAAM, Meteor, ASRAAM, IRIS-T will be integrated, Litening III, Enhanced Paveway II/III/IV will be integrated, Storm Shadow and Tauras long range standoff weapons and others such as JDAM, JDOW and HARM will also be integrated.

The in-development CTF's, increased thrust engines, increased capability EWSP and possibly TVC engine nozzles and CAESAR radar will also be in-service or "available".

Very FEW capabilities will then be available on other aircraft, that Typhoon can't do.

Big-E have you flown the Typhoon? You might be surprised. John Jumper certainly was...

I await the inevitable response...

 

[DarthAmerica]

You have proven nothing. Your statements have been contradictory, to try and suit the comments made by other knowledgeable posters. State WHY you know something or HOW, or else why bother trying to convince us? Where have YOU obtained this knowledge from? The sources you have provided to date, have in the main, contradicted your OWN arguments.

First of all I am not at all interested in convincing you or anybody else of anything. I am stating my opinions based on years of experience with these matters including first hand knowledge and inside contacts. What you take away from these post is up to you. If you have a different point of view thats fine. If you wish to debate those points of view even better. But if at the end of the day you dont change your opinion then so be it. But to date almost every analysis I've ever done or opinion I have ever offered in regard to military aircraft has been correct.

Second I think if you read carefully what I am saying here. You would find that our opinions arent all that different at the points of origin and at the conclusions. But somewhere in between the Eurofighter has gained an ill deserved cult following that attributes a superiority that does not exist when compared to its contemporaries and vanishes all together in the face of later generations. ANY EVOLVED F-TEEN will easily outclass the Eurofighter in overall combat performance today and through 2012. In the case of the F-15SG, F-15K, F-16E and F/A-18E this lead will almost certainly continue. None of these platforms are near the limit of their growth potential and considerable interest for their evolution exist and its backed my many times more money and manpower than Europe could ever throw into the Eurofighter. And unlike the multinational Eurofighter, these platforms are not mired in the political mess that inhibits the Eurofighter. Take a look at the Rafale which is already more developed than the Eurofighter and it was started AFTER the Eurofighter.

Finally, you acknowlegde that the Eurofighter is not at the same level of capability as the F-teens through 2012. See Below...

"Give the Typhoon a quarter of the development period the teen fighters have had, when it hits full operational capability and then you'll have a reason to criticise if not up to speed. By 2012, the full Block II capability will be in place, AIM-9L/M, AMRAAM, Meteor, ASRAAM, IRIS-T will be integrated, Litening III, Enhanced Paveway II/III/IV will be integrated, Storm Shadow and Tauras long range standoff weapons and others such as JDAM, JDOW and HARM will also be integrated." ---Aussie Digger

...All things F-Teens have been doing for 10 to 20 years!

And you futher acknowledge that a FEW, to use your words, will still exceed it then. Ok well let me help you to define that short list. Late model F-15, F-16, F/A-18, F-22 and F-35's. Thats five fighter platforms. And I havent even discussed the SU-27 series or future Russian and possibly Chinese designs.

 

[Aussie Digger]

First of all I am not at all interested in convincing you or anybody else of anything. I am stating my opinions based on years of experience with these matters including first hand knowledge and inside contacts. What you take away from these post is up to you. If you have a different point of view thats fine. If you wish to debate those points of view even better. But if at the end of the day you dont change your opinion then so be it. But to date almost every analysis I've ever done or opinion I have ever offered in regard to military aircraft has been correct.

Second I think if you read carefully what I am saying here. You would find that our opinions arent all that different at the points of origin and at the conclusions. But somewhere in between the Eurofighter has gained an ill deserved cult following that attributes a superiority that does not exist when compared to its contemporaries and vanishes all together in the face of later generations. ANY EVOLVED F-TEEN will easily outclass the Eurofighter in overall combat performance today and through 2012. In the case of the F-15SG, F-15K, F-16E and F/A-18E this lead will almost certainly continue. None of these platforms are near the limit of their growth potential and considerable interest for their evolution exist and its backed my many times more money and manpower than Europe could ever throw into the Eurofighter. And unlike the multinational Eurofighter, these platforms are not mired in the political mess that inhibits the Eurofighter. Take a look at the Rafale which is already more developed than the Eurofighter and it was started AFTER the Eurofighter.

Finally, you acknowlegde that the Eurofighter is not at the same level of capability as the F-teens through 2012. See Below...

"Give the Typhoon a quarter of the development period the teen fighters have had, when it hits full operational capability and then you'll have a reason to criticise if not up to speed. By 2012, the full Block II capability will be in place, AIM-9L/M, AMRAAM, Meteor, ASRAAM, IRIS-T will be integrated, Litening III, Enhanced Paveway II/III/IV will be integrated, Storm Shadow and Tauras long range standoff weapons and others such as JDAM, JDOW and HARM will also be integrated." ---Aussie Digger

...All things F-Teens have been doing for 10 to 20 years!

And you futher acknowledge that a FEW, to use your words, will still exceed it then. Ok well let me help you to define that short list. Late model F-15, F-16, F/A-18, F-22 and F-35's. Thats five fighter platforms. And I havent even discussed the SU-27 series or future Russian and possibly Chinese designs.

So why start a thread and argue about it going on to 7 or 8 pages?

If you are so convinced the Typhoon is inadequate, prove it? An un-supported opinion is worthless in a discussion. Back up your claims, if you can, or don't bother discussing these things. Nothing is a fact unless you can verify it. IF you can't or won't do it publicly, again, why bother starting up such a discussion?

IF you CAN prove it, I'm sure Italy, Spain, Germany, Great Britain, Austria, Saudi Arabia, Greece and probably Turkey will be VERY interested to hear it. I have no doubt they consider Eurofighter WILL be more capable than their respective Teen series or equivalent fighters. Given the degree to which they are no doubt informed, I find it difficult to see how you could argue with them.

To address a few of your capability points, in the current "Air International" magazine (June 2006), they provided an update on the progress of the EF-2000 (as the Spaniards call it, not having adopted the Typhoon moniker) in Spanish service, in an interview with the pilots of the Spanish integration unit, they stated that the "EF-2000 has a 50% greater detection range than Spain's existing upgraded F/A-18A/B's".

It also mentions the Eurofighters ability to climb to 40,000ft only a minute, 40 seconds AFTER brakes release, implying a considerably greater performance advantage over it's existing F/A-18 and Mirage fighters... Each Spanish Hornet driver, will also have to have a minimum of 2000 hours on the Hornet, prior to converting to Eurofighter.

I hardly think they'd "rave" about their new "mounts" if they are as in-capable as you THINK.

In Spanish service, the Eurofighter has not yet entered operational service. It is expected to do so, by the start of 2008. Yet by 2010, they expect to have IRIS-T, AMRAAM, Litening III, GBU-10/12/16 and possibly Meteor in-service.

Would you like to compare this to the level of capability provided by F/A-18, F-16 with 2 years of service under it's belt??? Neither could lase their own LGB's and F-16 had no BVR missile capability at that point whatsoever and couldn't even fight at NIGHT...

As to JSF, it won't be operational in 2012. LRIP "Block 1" variants will be delivered to customers, but won't be allowed to fly outside the US due to a lack of airworthiness certification. RAAF is expecting to get it's JSF's in Australia and issued to 2 OCU in 2013, with IOC anywhere between 2014 and 2015. This is IF the program goes as smoothly as promised.

RAAF's F-35A's will be ordered either late this year or in 2007...

Full operational status for F-35A Block II variants is not expected until 2015-2017. Given that the JSF precusor program (JAST) program kicked off in 1994, that adds up to 23 years of development, prior to full operational capability, according to my basic math.

The advanced tactical fighter program (F-22 precursor) began in 1981 and achieved IOC in December 2005. Full operational capability is many years off yet. Seems to be about 25 years of development and production to me, with numerous well documented delay's...

I wouldn't be too harsh on EADS myself, particularly if you compare it to US industry. They have differed little in development time taken on next generation aircraft developments...

As to the 2012 capability issue. I beg to differ, I believe for the reasons stated above, that Eurofighter WILL achieve a greater level of capability than ANY teen series fighter by 2012. In certain roles, it is more capable NOW (WVR A2A combat for instance) than the majority of teen series fighters and it's NEW. Given the development time it will achieve far greater capability.

If you want to argue semantics, than teen series fighters are also MORE capable than JSF and probably F-22 right NOW, as they are obviously more mature.

The same argument exists for Arleigh Burke destroyers and the DD(X) destroyer. Would you care to argue that DD(X) won't be more capable?