Eurofighter Typhoon

FighterJock said:
At last, Germany see's sense and allows Turkey permission to finally purchase the Typhoon. I for one cannot wait to see a Typhoon finally flying in Turkish Air Force colours.
Click to expand...
I, for one, am against this sale but what's interesting is that Turkey is insisting on integrating national systems to the aircraft.
 
Let's see what happens to the S-400s that is what cost Turkey the F-35 program. Perhaps that was the stiking point to Germany making the deal.
 
snne said:
I, for one, am against this sale but what's interesting is that Turkey is insisting on integrating national systems to the aircraft.
Click to expand...
Depends what they mean by that: weapons? different communication links? Or more underpinning?
 
BAE had a stake in the Gripen Jackonicko, don't know if they still maintain development ties with Sabb now.
 
FighterJock said:
BAE had a stake in the Gripen Jackonicko, don't know if they still maintain development ties with Sabb now.
Click to expand...
BAE SYSTEMS sold its Saab shares back in 2011.
www.defenceweb.co.za

BAE Systems sells entire stake in Saab - defenceWeb

BAE Systems is selling 11 million of its shares in Swedish defence group Saab for £152 million, marking the end of its 16 year long relationship with the company. The Financial Times reports that BAE Systems’s 11.2 million shares account for a little more than 10% of Saab’s equity. The sale of...
www.defenceweb.co.za www.defenceweb.co.za
 
They had a formal 30% stake in the Gripen C/D but sold it to SAAB, they are still a major parts supplier on the E with an informal parts share of similar proportion to their stake in the F-35 and a couple of years back they signed a new technical support and sales promotion agreement that will see their share in the E program gradually increase as its upgraded in future with more BAE tech, I think the new agreement principally covers weapons and targeting technology and integration as MBDA is a major munition supplier to SAAB. So SAAB would be able to market to foreign customers integration of British MBDA weapons on the Gripen.
 
Jackonicko said:
IIRC it was BAE who fixed the Gripen FCS issues....
Click to expand...

I believe they did. Used to work with a guy from BAE in FCS, he spent a lot of time with his team in Sweden, Germany....and even the Skunk Works sorting issues out at other companies request. Of all the outfits he was least impressed with Skunk Works...wouldn't tell me what he worked on or what he saw there though (he did say it was very compartmentalised though).
 
timmymagic said:
This is an interesting thread....particularly around the comments around common baseline for the fleet...does this imply having the EK capability being able to be ported across airframes? Or what? Looks like the hope for further German orders beyond the intial EK, Quadriga and additional 20 a/c has diminished though.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1846123791077785808
View: https://x.com/GarethJennings3/status/1846123791077785808
Click to expand...

Likely the same software being run and the hardware being a plug and play addition, saves having to maintain multiple versions of the OS.
 
Jackonicko said:
IIRC it was BAE who fixed the Gripen FCS issues....
Click to expand...
Lear Astronics, BAE bought them later (c2004?)

ETA: Which meant BAE Systems then had two completely separate FCS divisions, Lear as was and Rochester UK. There was no contact between them at the project level, probably because we'd still be trying to sort out the ITAR mess now.
 
Last edited:
red admiral said:
Depends what they mean by that: weapons? different communication links? Or more underpinning?
Click to expand...

Something's really getting cooked here, I personally wouldn't believe it if it wasn't for this guy who is objectively the most trusted and reliable insider/journalist in Turkish military matters:

On the other hand, the Turkish Air Force will also gain ramjet-propelled METEOR air-to-air missile capability with the Eurofighter Typhoon Aircraft. Good news is expected to come in a few days regarding the Eurofighter Typoon procurement. If the source code supply required for the integration of national missile and sensor systems (for the Tranche 3+ Block 7 version, which is also in the QEAF inventory) is possible as requested, we will be able to see GÖKHAN -(an indigenous equivalent whose launch tests are set to begin next year)- on the Eurofighter Typhoon...
Click to expand...

Source: Ibrahim Sunnetci (https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ibrahim-sünnetci-b2951544_tübi̇tak-sage-ana-yükleniciliğinde-geliştirme-activity-7252627678246174720-Pvcl?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios)

If anyone's curious, here's more info on the mentioned missile along with the existing ones: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/tai-tf-x-milli-muharip-uçak-mmu-kaan.13448/post-657692
 
Last edited:
DWG said:
Lear Astronics, BAE bought them later (c2004?)

ETA: Which meant BAE Systems then had two completely separate FCS divisions, Lear as was and Rochester UK. There was no contact between them at the project level, probably because we'd still be trying to sort out the ITAR mess now.
Click to expand...
That may actually be a good thing for BAE, since it gives them an ITAR compliant team to deal with US bullcrap and the Rochester team for everyone else.
 
Scott Kenny said:
That may actually be a good thing for BAE, since it gives them an ITAR compliant team to deal with US bullcrap and the Rochester team for everyone else.
Click to expand...
It wasn't so good for Rochester, as US work then got siphoned* to ex-Lear, whereas before that they'd been the USN's goto FBW supplier with the replacement DFCS projects for F-14 and A-6, plus the fly-by-light system for the YEZ-2A.

* The cynic in me suspects this is actually the real point of ITAR.
 
DWG said:
It wasn't so good for Rochester, as US work then got siphoned* to ex-Lear, whereas before that they'd been the USN's goto FBW supplier with the replacement DFCS projects for F-14 and A-6, plus the fly-by-light system for the YEZ-2A.

* The cynic in me suspects this is actually the real point of ITAR.
Click to expand...
It would not surprise me.
 
DWG said:
It wasn't so good for Rochester, as US work then got siphoned* to ex-Lear, whereas before that they'd been the USN's goto FBW supplier with the replacement DFCS projects for F-14 and A-6, plus the fly-by-light system for the YEZ-2A.

* The cynic in me suspects this is actually the real point of ITAR.
Click to expand...

ITAR is indeed a huge mess. I remember one of our engineers being a US citizen, he was not even the original equipment designer, but suddenly there was a huge mess and concerns because the equipment was suddenly declared ITAR. Can't remember how the story ended, but that the engineer was at least temporarily taken out of charge for that piece of equipment. Another case that I remember was that there was a manufacturer change and a US company became the new manufacturer of a European designed item and suddenly an ITAR label was put on it. Luckily that item was just a component of a subassembly and was not described in the end customers documentation, so that there was no need to classify the equipment documentation as ITAR, as it contained no information about a european designed part that was now being manufactured by a US sub-supplier, to whom we had no legal connections as he was managed by the equipment supplier.
 
ITAR is also a pretty healthy tax income thing. Anyone who makes anything listed under the ITAR laws must pay a tax (couple thousand a year), even if you only sell that item inside the US. If you sell internationally, you pay even more taxes (tens of thousands a year, plus IIRC taxes per export as well).
 
Yes, in return for a slowdown in airframe work, we are going to be allowed to export missiles to oil rich Arabs which would naturally match the airframe in service entry because ram-jet missiles have been a thing notionally since quite a bit of time. For this we must buy the Typhoon? No, we must not, thank you.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom