Armed Forces Minister inspects growth of Typhoon Force in Scotland

#1
Ministry of Defence said:
Armed Forces Minister Andrew Robathan has paid a visit to RAF Leuchars to witness first-hand the progress that the RAF has made in growing the Typhoon Force in Scotland.

More...
 
#2
Do you find yourself lying in the pub about what you do as you're too ashamed of yourself?
 
#3
The visit of death they will be cut back next year then.
Did not the PM visit our last carrier In when it was in yank land for a visit and told the crew how they were the dogs nuts then three weeks later binned the ship and the whole Harrier fleet.

We will never learn to trust any thing the politicians say they lie through there back teeth.
I remember Blair and his love rival Brown saying that the country had to much of a crime wave and that they would recruite thousands of new coppers which they did now they are laying them off by the thousands tough on crime my arse.

Many years ago I remember a vist by the Armed Forces review body I had the pleasure of sitting down for lunch with one of the I had a brief from the Adgt along the lines of every thing is good and I was happy with every thing,the brief also included a hint that if I did not keep the party line I would be in a world of pain how ever my pet Hitler with the big gob was also sitting down for lunch and by heck did she let rip.
Not a single thing changed at all total lying twats I have never heard of a honest politician in my life.
 
#5
Typhoon fighters played a key role in striking with precision Libyan regime targets on the ground.
And there was me thinking it had something to do with the munitions and the ally geezer with the laser.
 
#6
I'm sure someone will help me out but was it supposed to be multi role ? I thought it was just meant to be a fighter ? A fighter without a gun IIRC ? Concrete replacing what would be a gun.
 
#7
How about a new take on a classic quote....

"Never before in the field of taxation, has so much been paid, by so many ...... to get so very few"
 
#8
The one second from left is actually the coach driver ...... he won the bet!

So what'll be news next week????

Minister Inspects British Army's Challenger Two Tank?
 
#9
View attachment 101020

An Air Commode, two Wg Cdrs and a WO. None of them dressed the same, all based on the same station. For a ministerial visit. Jesus, even the ones wearing polyester kecks can't get the same shade. And his woolly pully needs some starch.

Last but not least, the minister HAS GOT HIS ****ing HANDS IN HIS POCKETS!!!
Also they all look ****ing threaders apart from one of the flying suit wearers who has cracked a half smile. The two outer blokes look like they have just discovered their wife is having an affair again but they will stay together until the kids leave home .
 
#10
What soil conditions do you need to grow typhoons then? Mine is a sand loam mixture which drains well, needs plenty of lime and organic compost!
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
#11
I'm sure someone will help me out but was it supposed to be multi role ? I thought it was just meant to be a fighter ? A fighter without a gun IIRC ? Concrete replacing what would be a gun.
You recall incorrectly; Typhoon's got its Mauser 27mm fitted and operational.
 
#12
View attachment 101020

An Air Commode, two Wg Cdrs and a WO. None of them dressed the same, all based on the same station. For a ministerial visit. Jesus, even the ones wearing polyester kecks can't get the same shade. And his woolly pully needs some starch.

Last but not least, the minister HAS GOT HIS ****ing HANDS IN HIS POCKETS!!!
There was me being told if 3 army officers were stood together all dressed the same, one was a spy.
 
#13
Also they all look ****ing threaders apart from one of the flying suit wearers who has cracked a half smile. The two outer blokes look like they have just discovered their wife is having an affair again but they will stay together until the kids leave home .
Is it now legal for enlisted and officers to have affairs?
 
#14
Has that Air Commode turned-up the legs of his flying suit?.. and look at the state of his fcuking shoes....when was the last time they saw some polish?? Sir, you are dressed more like a fcuking liney than the senior RAF officer in Scotland !!
 
#15
/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Barry Buddon /images/buttons/viewpost-right.png
I'm sure someone will help me out but was it supposed to be multi role ? I thought it was just meant to be a fighter ? A fighter without a gun IIRC ? Concrete replacing what would be a gun.



You recall incorrectly; Typhoon's got its Mauser 27mm fitted and operational.
He recalls perfectly correctly. The MoD in its wisdom decided to cancel the order for the Mauser and replace it with concrete. They only changed their mind when BritishWasteOfSpace informed them that to get the concrete to match the gun in terms of weight distribution would cost more than the real gun.

Then there was the issue of the MoD trying to get out of ordering any ammunition for the guns...
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
#17
He recalls perfectly correctly. The MoD in its wisdom decided to cancel the order for the Mauser and replace it with concrete. They only changed their mind when BritishWasteOfSpace informed them that to get the concrete to match the gun in terms of weight distribution would cost more than the real gun.

Then there was the issue of the MoD trying to get out of ordering any ammunition for the guns...
It's a typically awful saga - a decade ago we declared we didn't desperately need a gun for air-to-air (to be fair, that's fairly credible if cash is tight) so would do without the BK27, then discovered how much it would cost to put an airworthy space/weight filler in its place (lots more than just buying the guns and not using them) so we didn't bin the gun but we took out the training and support, then when Typhoon was being tipped for Afghanistan the previously-deprecated option of strafe was back on the table and so the BK27 was back as a desirable option for air-to-ground...

However, point remains that Typhoon has always had a working gun fitted ; the issues about making it an official, supported, enduring and useful capability are financial and political, not technical.



How much money have we pissed away in this sort of penny-pinching wankery? I don't even want to think about it. But I'm sure it all made perfect sense to somebody, somewhere, who got a glowing report, a promotion and a knighthood out of it (and was safely retired when the chickens started returning to their roosts)
 
#18
I can remember reading the justifying comments - in the open press - by the RAF officer who'd undertaken the study to get rid of the gun... a prime example of self-justificating pomposity over something that he should've known wasn't right.

History tells us that pretty much every time we've tried to do away with a gun, we've ended up putting one back. The F-4 flew without one, then had to have one fitted (podded or under-nose, depending on who you were); Harrier lost its when the 25mm Aden got into development difficulties and then what were we crying out for over Afghanistan? Guns.

The Typhoon's gun story just got silly. The proposal to replace with concrete lumps only got scuppered because the designers pointed out that with a modern flight control system being so finely balanced, those concrete lumps would have to have exactly the same weight and - crucially - weight distribution as the gun... so you might as well fit the gun. Then we had all the bollocks about not buying ammunition.

Nice on a plane that was always supposed to be swing-role and not just A2A... although guns remain pretty useful close-in when your eight AAMs have all gone. And the Mauser's no slouch; there's been some very interesting comment over on PPRUNE recently on why the F-35 didn't get it rather than a (US-designed) Gatling. The answer has all and everything to do with the words in brackets there.

...how much money is actually wasted on rubbish like this? How much of that money could just go into funding something up to spec and role?
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
#19
From the same argument CC (haven't been to visit PPrune) fitting the Mauser to the F35 would require the same balancing act and increased cost? For the piddling handful of F35 we intend to buy as an air inferiority fighter of low endurance?
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top