Delivery of 400th Eurofighter

[Jimbuna]

This aircraft always reminds me of what a twin engined F-16 would look similar to....an awesome multi role aircraft.

The German Air Force has today taken delivery of the 400th aircraft during special ceremony at Cassidian’s Military Air Systems Center in Manching, Southern Germany. It was built by the Eurofighter consortium, which includes us.

http://www.baesystems.com/article/BA...3D11tk7a76pp_4

[Herr-Berbunch]

All good

[eddie]

I always liked the looks of that aircraft too Jim!

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by eddie

I always liked the looks of that aircraft too Jim!

Rgr that

[MGR1]

Good aircraft, better exports than the French Rafale, but it's still getting replaced by the F-35 at some point (2020's?).

Assuming we can still afford the F-35......

Mike.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Herr-Berbunch

All good

Little do you know! Last time I checked - which was maybe 2 or 3 months ago - over one half of the German Eurofighters were grounded (since longer time already) due to several unsolved safety issues and technical problems. I seem to recall talk was half a dozen showstoppers, and two dozens of technical issues recommending the suspension of operational flight service.

This plane is far from having left its Kinderkrankheiten behind. The problem of so many machines grounded is so serious that the German pilots have difficulties to scratch together even the inevitable minimum of practice hours in air.

I hate to say it, but not too much is good with the (German) Eurofighter. At least they have learned from the Starfighter disaster. When Lockheed returned one of the many, many crashed German F-104s and inspected it back in the US, they said this was the by far mostly poorly maintained Starfighter they had ever seen - Germany had bought more F-104s at that time than the Luftwaffe's engineers could manage to properly maintain. As a consequence they did not stop from falling out of the sky. Over one third of the German machines crashed, I think.

The German armed forces have problems with quite man y of their modern systems. The latest corvette has problems. The new helicopter for the navy is described to be totally unsuited. The new IFV has problems with its gun and engine, and electronics. The assault rifle internally is described as a total fail. The Eurohawk drone - administrative failure. And several other major projects being stuck or plagued by problems as well. And then there is the lacking interest and high quitting rate of voluntary recruits since the draft was abandoned. The Bundeswehr currently is unable to get as many recruits as it needs, just two weeks ago an analysis showed that at this rate of personnel decline the army needs to turn to mercenary contractors within the forseeable future. The ability of Germany to fulfill NATO obligations in case of a conflict is seen as "currently not given", and "unlikely to be given within the next future".

Also two weeks ago there was a report showing that the huge majority of veterans returning from operations in Afghanistan with mental and psychological problems, stay untreated and sun supported. Additionally, which is even more worrying maybe, it was sown that the German prevention and selections ystem works so badly that 1 in 5 soldiers get sent to oversea missions while already suffering from psychological health issues that should normally ban him from being sent, and making therapeutic treatment mandatory. Serious this is because there an only be two explanations: either the screening system is incapable to serve its purpose, or the Bundeswehr simply cannot afford to care due to a too thin personnel pool.

Additionally, I point out that psychological health correlates with social class. The mean social profile of the Bundeswehr has constantly dropped in the past 10 or even 20 years.

I think that practically all our neighbours currently have armed forces that are in better shape.

[eddie]

I think sometimes Skybird, that the companies that build these new military equipment (whether its planes, tanks or ships) are making them too high tech in some regards. It might look good on paper, but its reliability is lacking. And that is happening all over, not just in Germany.

[Skybird]

They promise too much at too little money. They do it intentionally, do ghet the contract. And when they got it, the bill grows, and the probolems become apparent. But then too much already has been payed as if somebody would want to pull out.

Its the same with public construction contracts. I only say Berlin airport. Hamburg's Elb-Philharmonie. Stuttgart 21 central rail station. The costs get artificially hidden and calculated too low. Againm, it gets done intentionally, and systematically.

[Jimbuna]

Why the problems with the Eurofighter Sky? I'm not aware of the RAF having any problems.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by eddie

I think sometimes Skybird, that the companies that build these new military equipment (whether its planes, tanks or ships) are making them too high tech in some regards. It might look good on paper, but its reliability is lacking. And that is happening all over, not just in Germany.

It has something to do with companies doing things for the government
It could have been building a bridge etc.

Same problem in Sweden and Denmark.

Just my 5 cent

Markus

[eddie]

I agree Markus!

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Why the problems with the Eurofighter Sky? I'm not aware of the RAF having any problems.

I do not know for sure, but it could be bad administration and incompetent project handling, which is an issue the ministry of defence is notoriously plagued by. The defence ministry is not popular amongst politicians to lead, it is seen as a career killer and often gets called the "ejection seat". New leaders fight uphill battles against the established bureaucracy and lobbyists. It seems that whenever they print something about how problems with defence could be explained, they unavoidably sooner or later mention mismanagement and bureaucracy standing in the way.

If you want to damage and destroy something that is good - leave it to political regulation and bureaucratic administration. It makes short process with anything that is constructive and basing on healthy reason.

P.S. I do not know the specific differences, but I think several nations are getting different versions of the plane. I seem to recall that the British Eurofighters are a different type than the German ones. But I am not certain. subsystems and equipment parts could be different, too.

[Jimbuna]

I certainly agree on your assessment of the effects politicians and bureaucrats have on matters they have no fundamental knowledge of.

The sub systems are definitely different from country to country, not too sure of differing versions/types though.

I certainly don't see any difference in personnel skills though, after all your country managed to keep the Phantom serviceable for far longer then we (the UK) did.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

I certainly don't see any difference in personnel skills though, after all your country managed to keep the Phantom serviceable for far longer then we (the UK) did.

The maintenance failures regardin g the German F-104 were not about quality of the engineers and service personnel, but quantity: drunk of himself, the minister of defence back then, Franz-Josef Strauss, ordered far more planes then the Luftwaffe had enough hands to handle.

The last German Phantom was phased out this very summer, and for some reason that I do not know (there was no word on it in thg local press), I saw my last - and first since many many years! - Phantom screaming by extremely low (less than 100 meters) right in my neighbourhood in late August or early September this year, close enough to read the markings. It was so low and close that when I lift my straight arm and spread my fingers, the span between small finger and thumb equal the length of the plane as I saw it. A sound I have not heard since almost 20 years, and never from that close a distance, and it really shook the air and ground! The shadow of the plane happened to hush right over my position. Incredible! If there was a fighterplane "of my childhood", then this one, I built I think 5 plastic kits of it in different scalings. It is urban area here, why that Phantom was showing off that low, I have no clue of. Maybe it was kind of a farewell flight, a salute to somebody. I do not know. But the low altitude should not have been, I am certain.

When i studied in Osnabrück, sometime in the very early nineties I was walking in a forest there, up a hilltop, the highest elevation in the whole Teutoburgerwald/Wiehengebierge region. They had observation towers on top, and VOR OSN is located somewhere there, and military radio masts, and military pilots used the hilltop as a visual navigation mark as well. I once was on a platform on that hill, when a pair of A-10s came by - VERY low. The wings and my eyes were almost on same level, the plane passed my position maybe 60 or 70 meters away. I raised my arm and waved, expecting nothing. But to my great disbelief the plane waved back with its wings, three times! No doubt the pilot had seen me! Unique sound that beast has, btw.

[Penguin]

I have an acquaintance who flies the Eurofighter for the Luftwaffe and is very impressed by the characteristics of the plane, especially its agility and handling. He flew in quite different environments, according to him the aircraft performed very well in everyone. He flew the Tornado and Phantom before and regards the Eurofighter as a quantum leap, even in comparison with the Tornado.
Heard some about mechanical problems from him and extra inspections/planes grounded. I will ask him next week, if he wants/can share some details with the public.

Originally Posted by Skybird

They promise too much at too little money. They do it intentionally, do ghet the contract. And when they got it, the bill grows, and the probolems become apparent. But then too much already has been payed as if somebody would want to pull out.

The biggest problem is the missing accountability. We did not only see a tripling of the costs, but also some stuff where the manufacturer screwed up. Of course nobody gets held accountable for this and gets fired or fined. Neither the political decision makers, nor the contractors. From what I read, some costs raised, due to failure on the manufacturers side. The nonpublic contracts are always watertight by the company's lawyers. So of course the taxpayer has to jump in for the bill.

Remember all the populist talk about Toll Collect, where some politicians promised to get some penalty money back from the manufacturers which didn't manage to start the system in time? Mysteriously they are all very quiete now - nothing hidden in a 17000 pages contract...