Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Typhoon Tranche 1

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Typhoon Tranche 1

Old 20th Sep 2021, 22:30
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 4,126
Typhoon Tranche 1

I am puzzled by the decision to retire the Tranche 1 Typhoons.

1) How can seven frontline squadrons, the OCU and the TES be sustained with just the 109 Tranche 2 and 3 aircraft?

2) How are these aircraft (whose support and sustainment costs are underpinned by TyTAN) not cost-effective for adversary/red air, the Falklands, and QRA?

3) How has Spain reached such a diametrically opposed conclusion that it is upgrading its 15 Tranche 1 aircraft for service through to 2040?

4) It was explained to me that Tranche 1 aircraft would not be viable post 2025, in that they would not be in line with regulatory requirements post 2025, as the RAF thinks they need to be able to operate from civil airports and in civil airspace when necessary.

Yet why would the Tranche 1 aircraft be unable to do this? Donít they have the NG LN-251 INU/GPS, and isnít that RNAV-5 compliant? The VOR/ILS network isnít being switched off so you donít have to do a GPS PBA when landing at a civil aerodrome, do you?

5) Why isnít more fuss being made about binning aircraft before theyíve notched up even half of their planned hours?

Jackonicko is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 00:12
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 21,006
I posted this in the sale thread

https://eurasiantimes.com/why-eurofi...yal-air-force/

I did think that if they are pure Air to Air surely they would be suited to use as dedicated Falklands cover. It does seem a total waste, both of resources and original funding. My bet is they have been reduced to produce to keep the rest flying.
NutLoose is online now  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 00:38
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,840
Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
I am puzzled by the decision to retire the Tranche 1 Typhoons.

1) How can seven frontline squadrons, the OCU and the TES be sustained with just the 109 Tranche 2 and 3 aircraft?

2) How are these aircraft (whose support and sustainment costs are underpinned by TyTAN) not cost-effective for adversary/red air, the Falklands, and QRA?

3) How has Spain reached such a diametrically opposed conclusion that it is upgrading its 15 Tranche 1 aircraft for service through to 2040?

4) It was explained to me that Tranche 1 aircraft would not be viable post 2025, in that they would not be in line with regulatory requirements post 2025, as the RAF thinks they need to be able to operate from civil airports and in civil airspace when necessary.

Yet why would the Tranche 1 aircraft be unable to do this? Donít they have the NG LN-251 INU/GPS, and isnít that RNAV-5 compliant? The VOR/ILS network isnít being switched off so you donít have to do a GPS PBA when landing at a civil aerodrome, do you?

5) Why isnít more fuss being made about binning aircraft before theyíve notched up even half of their planned hours?
Jacko, any rumor where they may end up? Wonder if the contract Red air providers would be interested assuming the Typhoons arenít sold to another military?
West Coast is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 07:29
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Jungle
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by West Coast View Post
Jacko, any rumor where they may end up? Wonder if the contract Red air providers would be interested assuming the Typhoons arenít sold to another military?
Not a cat in hells chance. Tr1 is significantly less serviceable than Tr2/3. It would cost a ridiculous amount to use as a Red Air platform from a contractor point of view. Supply chain and spares are already taught for Typhoon so it would likely be worse for a civilian operated fleet. Thatís just the tip of the iceberg for issues with a civilian company buying and operating them.
Foghorn Leghorn is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 08:59
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The 24th & a Half Century
Posts: 225
Originally Posted by Foghorn Leghorn View Post
Not a cat in hells chance. Tr1 is significantly less serviceable than Tr2/3. It would cost a ridiculous amount to use as a Red Air platform from a contractor point of view. Supply chain and spares are already taught for Typhoon so it would likely be worse for a civilian operated fleet. Thatís just the tip of the iceberg for issues with a civilian company buying and operating them.
Concur, it would be the last platform on the list, assuming it was ever on one. I'm also of the opinion that there won't be a contracted replacement unless procurement has been revolutionised and there's actually funding, which there isn't.
DuckDodgers is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 09:06
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 4,126
Originally Posted by Foghorn Leghorn View Post
Tr1 is significantly less serviceable than Tr2/3.
Is it though? In the UK isn't it operated under an incentivised, availability-based support contract, ensuring that it meets specific availability rates at a guaranteed and predictable cost?
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 09:07
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 529
As I understand it, the T1 aircraft are pretty much completely different aircraft under the skin. Different black boxes, different architecture etc so I suppose that the cost of supporting that unique fleet is a saving worth making.
Timelord is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 09:29
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Jungle
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
Is it though? In the UK isn't it operated under an incentivised, availability-based support contract, ensuring that it meets specific availability rates at a guaranteed and predictable cost?
Yes, it is less serviceable. If you know you know.
Foghorn Leghorn is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 11:09
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: London
Posts: 438
5) Why isn’t more fuss being made about binning aircraft before they’ve notched up even half of their planned hours?
This is the only 'fuss' I can find, but most of it is behind a pay wall so can't see much of the detail unfortunately https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...ours-remaining
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackonicko View Post
Is it though? In the UK isn't it operated under an incentivised, availability-based support contract, ensuring that it meets specific availability rates at a guaranteed and predictable cost?
Yes, it is less serviceable. If you know you know.
Has it become significantly less serviceable in the 6 years since it was decided to retain them through to 2040? I recall everyone lauding that decision at the SDSR15, saying it would take the strain of the T2/3 fleets will still providing a top-level QRA and air defence capability (not to mention the Aggressor training plans for the fleet). Now, just a few years later it now transpires that the earlier decision was flawed and that the T1 fleet is a basket case? I don't buy it.
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 11:12
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Jungle
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Mil-26Man View Post
This is the only 'fuss' I can find, but most of it is behind a pay wall so can't see much of the detail unfortunately https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...ours-remaining


Has it become significantly less serviceable in the 6 years since it was decided to retain them through to 2040? I recall everyone lauding that decision at the SDSR15, saying it would take the strain of the T2/3 fleets will still providing a top-level QRA and air defence capability (not to mention the Aggressor training plans for the fleet). Now, just a few years later it now transpires that the earlier decision was flawed and that the T1 fleet is a basket case? I don't buy it.
You donít have to buy it if you donít want to. Iíd be interested to hear your experience of it rather than reading newspaper clippings.
Foghorn Leghorn is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 11:54
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: London
Posts: 438
Ok Foghorn, I'll bite. Unless the purpose of you posting to a public forum is to tell everyone else that you're the expert and we should all mind our own business, why don't you explain to the rest of us, in words that we would understand, how it is that the T1 fleet has gone from being good to fly for another 20-odd years in 2015 to being knackered and ripe for retirement in 2020, and how the fleet has managed to achieve this with more than half of its airframe hours remaining?

Don't break OPSEC, obviously.
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 12:43
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Jungle
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Mil-26Man View Post
Ok Foghorn, I'll bite. Unless the purpose of you posting to a public forum is to tell everyone else that you're the expert and we should all mind our own business, why don't you explain to the rest of us, in words that we would understand, how it is that the T1 fleet has gone from being good to fly for another 20-odd years in 2015 to being knackered and ripe for retirement in 2020, and how the fleet has managed to achieve this with more than half of its airframe hours remaining?

Don't break OPSEC, obviously.
Some fantastic whataboutery right there from you. I asked you to give us your personal experience of why Tr1 is as serviceable as Tr2/3 given you said you werenít having it. I didnít tell anyone to mind their own business either.
Foghorn Leghorn is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 12:50
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: London
Posts: 438
I have no involvement in maintaining the RAF's Eurofighter fleet, hence my questions. If I had personal experience, I wouldn't need to ask the questions.

So again, perhaps you could explain to us laymen how it is the T1 fleet has become unviable in just five short years, and with more than half of its airframe life remaining?

Nothing classified, of course.
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 13:04
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 566
Originally Posted by Mil-26Man View Post
Ok Foghorn, I'll bite. Unless the purpose of you posting to a public forum is to tell everyone else that you're the expert and we should all mind our own business, why don't you explain to the rest of us, in words that we would understand, how it is that the T1 fleet has gone from being good to fly for another 20-odd years in 2015 to being knackered and ripe for retirement in 2020, and how the fleet has managed to achieve this with more than half of its airframe hours remaining?

Don't break OPSEC, obviously.
A/ Politics
B/ We're broke
Doctor Cruces is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 13:30
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 297
The narrative around T1 seems to have followed a similar course to that around the Shar FA2. Prior to the announcement of the latter's early retirement it was a wonderful example of British ingenuity, pairing up the superlative Blue Vixen with AIM120, punching above its weight and striking fear into potential opponents. Immediately following the announcement it became obsolescent trash...
Frostchamber is online now  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 13:41
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 187
Originally Posted by Mil-26Man View Post
This is the only 'fuss' I can find, but most of it is behind a pay wall so can't see much of the detail unfortunately https://www.janes.com/defence-news/n...ours-remaining


Has it become significantly less serviceable in the 6 years since it was decided to retain them through to 2040? I recall everyone lauding that decision at the SDSR15, saying it would take the strain of the T2/3 fleets will still providing a top-level QRA and air defence capability (not to mention the Aggressor training plans for the fleet). Now, just a few years later it now transpires that the earlier decision was flawed and that the T1 fleet is a basket case? I don't buy it.
Disclaimer - no knowledge of Tr1 or Typhoon supportability whatsoever, but some knowledge of how priorities change.

I suspect the latter is the driving force. If you have a (relatively) fixed bucket of money, you can choose to spend that in different ways as reviews pass. It may be that someone senior has made a decision that the future is optionally crewed either because we can't train and retain crews in sufficient numbers, or because uncrewed options have matured quicker than planned and - provided a cash injection can be provided - may be able to be fielded quicker than planned, thereby saving money, adding capability and/or mass. At that point, if the required cash injection requires discarding a fleet (or fleet within fleet) to realise it, a change in direction may be the decision. Doesn't mean the earlier decision was necessarily flawed, just that circumstances have changed.

Purely personal view only.
Not_a_boffin is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 13:42
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: London
Posts: 438
Originally Posted by Frostchamber View Post
The narrative around T1 seems to have followed a similar course to that around the Shar FA2. Prior to the announcement of the latter's early retirement it was a wonderful example of British ingenuity, pairing up the superlative Blue Vixen with AIM120, punching above its weight and striking fear into potential opponents. Immediately following the announcement it became obsolescent trash...
Exactly this.
Mil-26Man is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2021, 23:29
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 637
Tranch 1 Tiffy is not alone:

SDSR 2015 - Sentry E-3D has a bright future out to 2035

SDSR 2020 - Sentry E-3D is a knackered old piece of junk that needs to be replaced ASAP. We need Wedgetail!
Party Animal is online now  
Old 22nd Sep 2021, 03:49
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 21,006
Similar fate with the Jag, cheap to operate and upgrade, served in Sandy places until they wanted shot of them then suddenly became not suitable and Tornado took over thus allowing them to be binned early.
NutLoose is online now  
Old 22nd Sep 2021, 05:48
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 384
A little OT but did anything happen about the interest expressed by indonesia in the swiss TR1's, because if you could get them and these might be a big enough critical number to work
rattman is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.