I mean why are we buying yank planes instead of Eurofighters
(
Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Mon 30 Jul 2012, 19:17,
Reply)
BAE Systems build something like 20% of the plane
And it'll be cheaper than trying to convert the Typhoon (which we build about 25% of) to carrier use.
(
evil_andy Stick stick stick stick sticky sticky stick stick, Mon 30 Jul 2012, 19:20,
Reply)
Carriers, innit.
Our non-nuclear carriers can't generate the steam force to launch the Typhoon, the typhoon airframe wouldn't like the stresses of arresting without modification and its limited air/ground attack capability make it pointless for the role. And it's not stealthy.
(
Rotating Wobbly Hat That's not a banana. THIS is a banana., Mon 30 Jul 2012, 19:23,
Reply)
For the cost of a navalised Typhoon
You could probably buy two or three Rafales. That'd be a hard sell.
(
evil_andy Stick stick stick stick sticky sticky stick stick, Mon 30 Jul 2012, 19:28,
Reply)
It's nice to see Dassault finally stop
turning out new versions of the Mirage. Take Heed, Porsche. Stop making 911s.
(
Rotating Wobbly Hat That's not a banana. THIS is a banana., Mon 30 Jul 2012, 19:35,
Reply)
In order to get the Typhoon to fly from a carrier...
...BAe would have to fit new undercarriage, reinforced folding wings, more powerful engines and flight controls, an arrestor hook complete with strengthened mounts, not to mention the necessary strengthened structure.
The end result would be heavier, more expensive and have less range than a carrier plane designed as such from the outset like an F-18 or Rafale. The Royal Navy has looked at buying Rafales, which could well be an option if the US decide to can the STOVL version of the F-35.
/nerd
(, Mon 30 Jul 2012, 21:03, Reply)
I forgot about the folding wings requirement.
well done sir.
(
Rotating Wobbly Hat That's not a banana. THIS is a banana., Mon 30 Jul 2012, 21:25,
Reply)