Eurofighter news

"John Cook" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 20:11:47 -0400, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:


"Peter Kemp" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 09:29:13 -0400, Yeff wrote:

Not impressed with this story - the paper claims....

But, just as the Royal Air Force prepares to take delivery of the
first
of
more than 200 Eurofighters to which it has been committed for almost a
decade, it has emerged that the RAF will not have all of them in its
hands
for long.

A sheepish Ministry of Defence (MoD) has admitted that moves are
already
underway to sell off dozens of the brand-new super-fighters as soon as
they
are delivered.

But what the MOD actually said was......

"Some consideration has been given to the scope to provide for early
export
of Eurofighter Typhoon to potential overseas customers," admitted
armed
forces minister Adam Ingram. "If pursued, a sale might be accomplished
by
adjusting the delivery profile to the RAF. The RAF remains, however,
the
primary customer for these aircraft and any decision made will take
full
account of its requirements."

Which is different. The MOD is saying it's prepared to delay delivery
of some of its buy in order to allow quicker delivery of export
models.

Extremely suspect journalism in other words.

While I generally agree with your critique in terms of the usual
journalistic twisting of words, the MoD quote does allow leeway for them
to
say later, "Well, we relooked at our requirements and decided we *really*
did not need 232 of these aircraft, that 180 is just fine..." or some
such
drivel. It is not as if it should be a surprise that the RAF and/or UK
government might cut back on their "requirement"; for gosh sakes, they
are
so close to the bone that they plan to field a chunk of them sans-guns
solely based upon financial concerns (that indicates a pretty nasty
budgeting situation to me).

The "However, the spokesman said that the ministry was still committed
to taking the same total number of aircraft. " bit that was missed out
of the newspaper peice, I havn't yet managed to find any reference to
the MoD saying that 180 is all thts needed!!!.

It was an example, you twit.

Brooks


cheers

The USAF has adjusted (downward) its requirments
for the F/A-22 over the years--that other nations would do the same for
high-dollar systems is to be expected, especially given the change in the
nature of the threat spectrum.

Brooks


Peter Kemp


John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

Extremely suspect journalism in other words.

While I generally agree with your critique in terms of the usual
journalistic twisting of words, the MoD quote does allow leeway for them
to
say later, "Well, we relooked at our requirements and decided we *really*
did not need 232 of these aircraft, that 180 is just fine..." or some
such
drivel. It is not as if it should be a surprise that the RAF and/or UK
government might cut back on their "requirement"; for gosh sakes, they
are
so close to the bone that they plan to field a chunk of them sans-guns
solely based upon financial concerns (that indicates a pretty nasty
budgeting situation to me).

The "However, the spokesman said that the ministry was still committed
to taking the same total number of aircraft. " bit that was missed out
of the newspaper peice, I havn't yet managed to find any reference to
the MoD saying that 180 is all thts needed!!!.

It was an example, you twit.

Sorry I was questioning the leeway bit and its sounds a bit ambigious
rereading it. - I should have said :-

I haven't yet managed to find any quotable reference to the MoD or
Eurofighter implying that a reduction was/is/may be being contemplated
or planned, now or in the future. nor any thing stated that could be
interpreted as a leaving the door open or leeway or ambiguities in
their statements that could be interpreted as a reduction is likely.

But that's a bit of a mouthful.

All the quotes from the officials always have a caveat either in the
paragraph or preceding it, that the full 232 will be purchased, and
that they are committed to the program, (now you shouldn't gather
from this that tranche 3 is safe, they are politicians after all.
;-)), but there are substantial penalties for any cancellation, The
only way I can think of to get around the penalties is for the RAF to
take delivery and then sell them to an export customer...messy but
possible.

Can you actually quote any quote from MoD/UK Govt that allows that
leeway or room for interpretation that the full 232 isnt being
purchased?, they seem to be very careful in what they are saying.


BTW the first tranche 1 aircraft will be upgraded to tranche 2 then
to tranche 3 aircraft as a rolling program, the plan being the fleet
is homogenous, the troubled UK tranche 2 negotiations is because of
tranche 3 planned requirements are required now, and they are trying
to incorporate some of them in tranche 2.

See http://www.airpower.at/news02/0119_e...r/tranchen.gif
for an old but more detailed description, the program is about 2
years behind, the program is now about at block 2.

Cheers



Brooks


cheers

The USAF has adjusted (downward) its requirments
for the F/A-22 over the years--that other nations would do the same for
high-dollar systems is to be expected, especially given the change in the
nature of the threat spectrum.

Brooks


Peter Kemp


John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk


John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

O
BTW the first tranche 1 aircraft will be upgraded to tranche 2 then
to tranche 3 aircraft as a rolling program, the plan being the fleet
is homogenous, the troubled UK tranche 2 negotiations is because of
tranche 3 planned requirements are required now, and they are trying
to incorporate some of them in tranche 2.

Ooops - I should say the tranche 2 negotiations for improvements to
AtoG may not be from tranche 3, they may be from later blocks in
tranche 2 (eg block 10 or 15), just incorporated earlier.

Cheers

John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk