Welcome to Britmodeller.com

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

  • Announcements

    • Mike

      PhotoBucket are no longer permitting 3rd party hosting   01/07/17

      As most of you are now painfully aware, Photobucket (PB) are stopping/have stopped allowing their members to link their accumulated years of photos into forums and the like, which they call 3rd party linking.  You can give them a non-refundable $399 a year to allow links, but I doubt that many will be rushing to take them up on that offer.  If you've previously paid them for the Pro account, it looks like you've got until your renewal to find another place to host your files, but you too will be subject to this ban unless you fork over a lot of cash.   PB seem to be making a concerted move to another type of customer, having been the butt of much displeasure over the years of a constantly worsening user interface, sloth and advertising pop-ups, with the result that they clearly don't give a hoot about the free members anymore.  If you don't have web space included in your internet package, you need to start looking for another photo host, but choose carefully, as some may follow suit and ditch their "free" members at some point.  The lesson there is keep local backups on your hard drive of everything you upload, so you can walk away if the same thing happens.   There's a thread on the subject here, so please use that to curse them, look for solutions or generall grouse about their mental capacity.   Not a nice situation for the forum users that hosted all their photos there, and there will now be a host of useless threads that relied heavily on photos from PB, but as there's not much we can do other than petition for a more equitable solution, I suggest we make the best of what we have and move on.  One thing is for certain.  It won't win them any friends, but they may not care at this point.    Mike.
Slater

Austria to phase out Eurofighter

39 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

 if the answer was 'Typhoon', they must have asked the wrong question

Hmm well I guess that might be true  clearly you know about such contracts :idea: but the onus in todays market is on the vendor not to sell a donkey.Advise and service support is part of the deal.....i know this because because i work in the support side of the industry having been on the other side of the fence.So to say that the wrong question was asked is well daft in my opinion.:D

Typhoon T 1 is a good aircraft and i do believe that it was the austrians who recently had to bale out the swiss who were off watch or something.

If the support contract was badly executed or the metrics were wrong then that is something of a joint problem to fix. At least it is the basis of a good aircraft other platform user dont have thst.

As for the grippen look at the users and potential users thst surround austria....you can see why the idea has legs

 :idea:

..

 

Edited by junglierating

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, T7 Models

True, though I doubt Austrians bothered to ask other treaty signing countries (Great Four) about that. Soviet Union collapsed by that time anyway. I imagine the other restriction was probably to prevent a creation of another potentially dangerous German super-state.

Few questions about Austrian Typhoons come to mind. A quick web search showed a handful of IRIS-T missiles had been bought to arm them. That sounds a lot like South Africa's initial purchase of six or eight IRIS-T missiles for their Gripens. I guess it would be possible to convert Typhoon's missiles for Gripens, if Austria decides to go this way, but would that make sense economically? And what is going to happen with original Austrian aircraft? I imagine there would be interested parties even for second-hand Tranche 1 Typhoons at the right price. Cheers

Jure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/7/2017 at 11:44 PM, XV107 said:

I came to the view that in Austria's case, if the answer was 'Typhoon', they must have asked the wrong question.

 

And another vote for this comment, totally agree

 

22 hours ago, Jure Miljevic said:

Hello

XV107, Austrian Typhoons should have been armed with cannon, free falling bombs and unguided rockets only. Austrian State Treaty from 1955 forbade this country to have any sort of guided weapon in its inventory. Then again, the same treaty forbade Austria and Germany to be both members of the same political or military organization again, and yet both countries are members of EU these days. Cheers

Jure

 

When Austria started the process to enter the EU, they had received reassurances from the Soviet Union (or whatever was the name in those days) that there would have been no veto from them against joining the Union. I've always felt surprised by the harsh treatment that Austria received from the Soviet Union in particular, the terms the Austrians had to subscribe were worse than those applied to Germany.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

Thanks, Giorgio N. Soviet Union treatment does not sound very surprising to me: majority of population of Republic of Austria considered themselves being of German nationality even before 1938 Anschluss. And for Slavic nations who fought Third Reich differences in origin of German soldiers were hardly the main concern. However, in the west war was less savage, and post-war political considerations assured future FRG had been treated relatively leniently, although I do not think DDR got off lightly. That is me done with politics and back to aviation: again, anyone cares to speculate what is going to happen with Austrian Typhoons? Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Jure Miljevic said:

That is me done with politics and back to aviation: again, anyone cares to speculate what is going to happen with Austrian Typhoons? Cheers

 

I prefer not to speculate, but I've always been a bit surprised that Austria wasn't on as the Gripen's first export customer. Austria certainly had a long and good history with Saab products, so why changea good thing?

 

The matter reminds me a fair bit of the controversies surrounding the Czech purchase of CASA 295 transports to replace the old Antonov An-26 fleet.

 

It was a very untransparent matter in which proper tendering and competition rules were sidestepped during procurement. It's said by some that the Czechs would be operating the C-27 now and not the C.295 if that deal had been done all above board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11.7.2017 at 11:48 AM, Jure Miljevic said:

Hello

XV107, Austrian Typhoons should have been armed with cannon, free falling bombs and unguided rockets only. Austrian State Treaty from 1955 forbade this country to have any sort of guided weapon in its inventory. Then again, the same treaty forbade Austria and Germany to be both members of the same political or military organization again, and yet both countries are members of EU these days. Cheers

Jure

The "unguided weapon" treaty is not effective any more, as far as I know.

According to rumours the Eurofighter might be replaced with Saab Grippen (likely), Italian M-346 (no super sonic speed, so unlikely) or even the American F-16.

It's probably gonna be a "second-hand" shopping at other Air Forces.

No one seems to like the Eurofighter in Austria (not even the pilots), given the rather shady acquisiton process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

Upnorth, after B17, Safir, J29, SAAB 105 and J35 Gripen looked like a natural choice to me, too. Roman, M-346 sounds like interesting choice, but I doubt that type is that much of an improvement over SAAB 105 OE so, as you said it, she is not very likely candidate. Between F-16 and JAS-39 I am obviously cheering for Gripen, although I must admit that from performance point of view even F-16 A would make fine air space policing fighter. Still, in about a year and a half it is going to be four decades since F-16's entry in service so maintenance costs for early versions of this fighter must be considerable. To continue our debate, buying second-hand fighters sounds like reasonable policy, but what about leasing, something along the lines of F-5 deal with Switzerland? Cheers

Jure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't remember precisely where at the moment, but I saw in another online discussion about this matter someone suggest the Kai FA-50 would be a very good candidate for Austria to replace the Typhoon with.

 

It is supersonic and it will do what Austria needs it to do, but I have no idea what relations between Austrian and South Korea are to even guess how realistic the idea could be. There is some logic to the idea as the FA-50 is descended from the T-50 trainer, Austria could get a replacement for both the Typhoon and Saab 105 from the same supplier, though I'm not sure how much parts commonality there is between the T-50 and FA-50.

 

Though I do have to admit that that I think it would look good in Austrian markings:

 

FA-50PH+tail+number+007+and+008.jpg

net photo

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Jure Miljevic said:

(...) but what about leasing, something along the lines of F-5 deal with Switzerland? Cheers

Jure

We've had some Swiss F-5s while awaiting the delivery of the Eurofighter.

16 hours ago, upnorth said:

I don't remember precisely where at the moment, but I saw in another online discussion about this matter someone suggest the Kai FA-50 would be a very good candidate for Austria to replace the Typhoon with.

 

 

 

To be honest I have never heard of that aircraft before ...

for the replacement of trainer aircraft Saab 105, there was talk about Czech L-29 in the newspaper.

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎.‎07‎.‎2017 at 4:11 PM, T7 Models said:

Not sure about East Germany, but the FRG was not permitted to undertake its own air defence up until the early 1990s, and relied on USAF and RAF fighters to stand QRA on its behalf.

 

Sure about that ? Both the 104 as well as the F-4F were operated by dedicated air defence wings, though it might be argued the original gun-plus-'winder-only armament of the Phantom was somewhat light for the purpose.

On ‎13‎.‎07‎.‎2017 at 2:04 PM, Roman Schilhart said:

 

for the replacement of trainer aircraft Saab 105, there was talk about Czech L-29 in the newspaper.

 

If the Austrians really consider the L-29 as 105 replacement, it's no wonder they bought the Tranche 1 Typhoons :P Surely a typo for L-39...

 

While it may well be that the Austrian Typhoon deal wasn't "clean", I seem to recall investigations into BAE's unit responsible for Gripen Export Marketing some time ago. Anyway, IIRC the Austrians apparently realised the Typhoon purchase ate too much of their Budget and tried to renegotiate the deal, with a reduction in numbers AND downgrading to the Tranche 1 machines, in order to save some Money. Now they are sueing Airbus for alleged fraud re the aircraft's capabilities, when they demanded a cost reduction partly via cheaper airframes...no comment. I know with whom I am sided...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it that Austria overstretched its resources?  Typhoon is a top draw product and not all countries can afford such a beast , as it's not just the purchase cost but the running costs and it seems to me that Austria got it wrong. Maybe Canada could make use of them for point defence and save the Hornets for the rest of it. Might be cheaper than Super Hornet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, tempestfan said:

Sure about that ? Both the 104 as well as the F-4F were operated by dedicated air defence wings, though it might be argued the original gun-plus-'winder-only armament of the Phantom was somewhat light for the purpose.

 

 

That is why the F-4F did not originally have AIM-7 capability. By the end of the 1980s QRA was the responsibility of the RAF at Wildenrath and the USAF at Bitburg. The Luftwaffe certainly had fighter wings -which spent as much time on the secondary fighter-bomber role- and SAM missile wings, but they never undertook QRA until 1991-ish when it was handed over by the RAF and USAF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

Upnorth, TA-50 would surely look good in Austrian markings. Just for fun (and to test PB replacement), how about naval single-seat NA-50(Ö) Seeadler version:

 

2YMaj0Q.jpg

 

Cheers

Jure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently Austria came within an ace of buying ex Saudi Lightnings.

 

They were cheaper than the Draakens, but politics intervened.

 

That is one WHIF I intend to fulfil on day......

 

Trevor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now