JSF - should we or shouldn't we?

[Dan4th]

Time and actual service will tell!!!!!

Should be interesting, don't you think?

Whole-hog for either aircraft in the Naval Role
is a little premature, though....

Too early to make a firm judgement YET!

Danf.

[Xplumberlives]

D4th do you have shares in either Lockheed/Martin or Boeing?

[Dan4th]

NOPE!

Just think the next few years ought to be
interesting as we FIND OUT what some on
here are already prepared to bet their ASSES
on........

ME? I'm waiting patiently for the outcome.....

Danf.

[Xplumberlives]

NOPE!
Just think the next few years ought to be
interesting as we FIND OUT what some on
here are already prepared to bet their ASSES
on........
ME? I'm waiting patiently for the outcome.....
Danf.

Oh, the MOONIE reference!

[Saracenman]

what sort of mos would Typhoon need then? obviously an arrestor hook, beefed up airframe.........what about the u/c? would it need longer travel? heavier duty?

what else?

PS - new name? Seaphoon?

[Dan4th]

Well, how about FOLDING WINGS???????

Trust me on this, they are not MY navy, but
I don't think you want to get them started
down this particular road -- no foolin' .....

Dan4th

Edit: Re: Moonie.......

I know you're willing to SHOW your's but how about
BET it?

Name: How about Cell-phoon????

No, don't get me wrong, I love the Typhoon, too. It's
just TOO SOON to judge the F-35 vs Eurofighter
contest with any finality. My personal feelings and
your personal feelings will have no bearing on the
FACTS as they emerge. This is gonna take some time.....

D.

[Saracenman]

i really don't think that the two can ever be 'compared' as aircraft Danf - they are both wholly different, designed for different tasks.

my only question really is do the RN actually NEED all the capabilities that the JSF offers over and above Typhoon? what the USN currently have is FAR closer to a navalised Typhoon than JSF - and you guys won't be using JSF to REPLACE your existing carrier aircraft; in fact, you guys don't really need JSF either i suspect!

with a larger carrier (aka HMS QEII / HMS PoW) do we really need an a/c that has STOVL - the fundamental 'trick' that Typhoon lacks?

as a mere airborne weapons platform, I'm certain that Typhoon beats JSF hands down, simply because that's the way that both were designed

sm

[Stevieboy]

What's wrong with Rafale?

Excepting the obvious that is.

[Dan4th]

SM:

What makes you think that Typhoon beats JSF
"Hands Down" ?????

You don't KNOW that yet.....

All of this is based simply on speculation, not
FACT. As for ME, I am waiting for FACT!!!!!

I ain't seen no FACTS yet, have YOU?????????

Typhoon has one foot in tomorrow and one foot
in today. It seems to ME that JSF has BOTH feet
in tomorrow, but I could always be WRONG, as I
have been many times before......................

When and IF Typhoon is proved to be the superior
aircraft, I will GLADLY acknowledge that FACT!
Until then I will just have to wait..................

Oh, for the FACTS, that is......

Danfortho Machismo::::::::

[Saracenman]

i agree - that's what I'm talking about - FACTS!

the JSF hasn't been DESIGNED to perform to the same spec as Typhoon - both aircraft exist, they are not merely on paper, so facts ARE known - they both out-perform what the original spec was, but they are still completely different machines, designed for completely different roles

Typhoon can fly faster, higher, further than JSF - it can reach max altitude MUCH quicker. the weapon-carrying abilities of each are very similar. what the JSF has over and above the Typhoon (and in SPADES!!!) is its STOVL capability - its versatility in that respect is not in question.

comparing JSF to the Harrier which it was designed to replace, again they are chalk and cheese. the Harrier has full VTOL ability that the JSF doesn't; it cannot takeoff and land vertically as the Harrier does. but overall, JSF's a FAR more capable machine

but this is the point of my original question - its a very simple question too - does the RN still have a NEED for an aircraft that can take off and land almost vertically? if we WEREN'T due to get these bigger carriers, JSF really would be the only option, as the existing Invincible class are far too small for a conventional a/c

don't get me wrong Danf, i don't think that JSF is crap - far from it! as a high-performance weapons platform, Typhoon is far superior - it was DESIGNED to be!

when the RN have carriers big enough, what would be the wisdom in buying/co-building an aircraft that could operate from a vessel a third the size, when they could have a faster, higher-flying, further-flying machine that is still capable of operating from the same ship

as i said before, the USN has the Nimitz class carriers, operating aircraft that are predominantly conventional - you chaps aren't buying JSF specifically for carrier ops. the QE-class carriers that we're getting aren't that much smaller - so why do we need to go out and buy a specialist bit of kit, specifically for a carrier that is large enough to operate a machine that we already have (sort of)?


Murkin JSFs will replace the Harriers that your Marine Corp use - we don't have a similar 'arm' - our Royal Marines don't fly!

when you couple that to the fact that Typhoon is currently in service with the RAF, the obvious benefits (economies of scale etc) would surely give them a machine with higher performance, and at far less cost

it's similar to asking why a sports-car would be 'better' than a van - well, if you want to carry lots of carpets and boxes, then you'd buy the van, but if you have no need for box or carpet carrying, why not go for the one that'll get you there quicker and more cheaply. if the missus already has the exact same sports-car, you'd probably get a better deal at the servicing agent of you took BOTH in

we USED TO need a van - in the cold war days, we were always carting carpets and boxes around, but that was then

given all of the above, i personally think that, whilst JSF would be a superb bit of kit, the RN and the taxpayer would get far MORE from using a navalised Typhoon instead

the employment/industry side of it is probably about equal - whichever we decide to buy, British industry has a comparable share in each - if we didn't buy 200 JSF, RR would have to make 200 fewer lift-fans - but then they'd be making 400 more Typhoon engines instead!

sm

[Dan4th]

JSF = Invisibility

Typhoon = ??????

Thoroughbred though it may be, WHAT?

All that MY point is? We do not yet KNOW
all of the things we NEED to know.......

Regarding your performance figures above?
US aircraft builders have a L-O-N-G history
of under-stating performance stats for the
aeroplanes that they manufacture.......
I could NAME a few of them.

The next few years will tell, and it's no use
trying today to assume anything. I am not in
any way supporting JSF over Typhoon. What I
AM supporting is a long, fair, tried and true
comparison IN SERVICE trial of the one vs the
other. The TRUTH shall PREVAIL!!!!! And when
it does, I will say so! And so will YOU!

Not until........

Danf.

[Saracenman]

fair point! i just hope it doesn't turn out to be ANOTHER costly mistake

we too understate performance figures - and the costs as well usually!

sm

[Xplumberlives]

Good debate so far, not sure we have really reached any conclusions though;

Shopping list for MOD (Navy) should include the following;

Two Carriers - (Liz & Charlie)
Steam catapults for both
Enlarged magazines;
for storage of additional weaponry associated with greater ordnance load of 60 Navalised Typhoons (Harpoons)

Any body care to add to the list?

[Pujgnie]

Judging by the Typhoons High Alpha display at airshows... they probably will not require 'hooking' too often

[Xplumberlives]

Judging by the Typhoons High Alpha display at airshows... they probably will not require 'hooking' too often

A valid point, but I suspect the jockey would prefer to have the option anyway!

[Saracenman]

quite! given the choice of a tailhook or RAG net............

[Xplumberlives]

quite! given the choice of a tailhook or RAG net............

Doth the shortone mean RHAG?

Runway
Hydraulic
Arrestor
Gear

[Saracenman]

nope - i mean RAG

[Xplumberlives]

nope - i mean RAG

Just showing your age there old (49) shortperson!

[Tom.com]

they should call it the UKfighter wet

[Saracenman]

how about Pontoon?

[Tom.com]

if there is a sea harrier how about sea typhoon???

Fishermans Typhoon?

[Saracenman]

i said earlier - SEAPHOON

[Tom.com]

yes but it is not a searrier is it?

[Saracenman]

negative Tom.com - it's a Seaphoon!