Why RAF Typhoons are ideal for defending Nato airspace next to Russia

[@danielbailey5849]

Typhoon should keep in service for long time , update them will be great

[@eddgar-ce3md]

The Typhoon is now at the mid point of its service life.

[@richardcato379]

Excellent information,thank you Sir.

[@Pete-Rocks]

Fight our way in and deliver to the target and fight our way out... Very Top Gun.

[@davidhouseman4328]

Clearly explained.

[@Newel77]

He is without a doubt the best

[@David-ws6zr]

Im not a pilot so really cant say how good the aircraft is, however the RAF can and they say its great so i believe in what experts say ,you can have the best jet, tank ect in the world but if you cant get the best out of it, then its useless, i cant speak for other countries but look at the uk armed forces, sas, sbs, army, navey, airforce and so on. in my opinion the uk armed forces are good because of there training and discipline ,so for me id look at the personnel and yes im quite proud of our forces,i worked with a lot of Falklands vets living in Portsmouth

[@jimjefftube]

Well done and always proud to be an ally to the UK!!

[@RussTillling]

Very interesting and very well explained. Thank you!🤩👏

[@wilsusonnect795]

An important piece would've also been that the Eurofighter is a system that only Europe has insight to. Germany is a participant in the US nuclear weapons programme. In the event that the United States decides to employ nuclear weapons stationed in Europe, it's possible that the German air force would fire them. For that, Germany needs nuclear capable aircraft. Currently, this role is fulfilled by the Panavia Tornado, but that is an aging platform. It was considered to modify the Eurofighter to be compatible with US American nukes, but that would've required giving the Americans insights into the design of the platform. Instead, Germany decided to buy the F-35 for that purpose.

[@seabee2653]

If the RAF supplied all nato planes in Europe I would be ok with that. If you have the infrastructure and materials I'm all for it + she is a beauty in all her variants.

[@WhateverMan35]

The Typhoon is known as the "Euro Typhoon". A pet project from the EU.

[@biddyboy1570]

​@@WhateverMan35no

[@WhateverMan35]

​@@biddyboy1570 yes

[@davidhouseman4328]

@@WhateverMan35 So EU it was run by the NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency ...

[@WhateverMan35]

​@@davidhouseman4328 The use of NATO is a front. NATO is a primarily a US organisation and there were no dealing with other NATO members other than European countries. The EU has time and time again used NATO to reinforce it's Common Security and Defence Policy.

[@Robert-xy4xi]

Airspace next to Russia! That says it all!

[@everypitchcounts4875]

The F-15EX missile truck would be nice as well

[@AlK-t4x]

Fab!

[@Ryan_Revier]

Even it is good, but the process isn’t as good as it looks like..🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️

[@American-In-Mykolaiv]

If they are so good, why has GB not provided them to Ukraine? What seems to be stopping the West from helping Ukraine with the weapons needed to push Russians out of Ukraine? The West has been dragging their feet for more than a year, giving the Russians time to dig in deeply. Long range missiles, attack helicopters, fighter aircraft -give what Ukraine needs!!!!!

[@davidhouseman4328]

We don't have enough.

[@vwtransportersandmotorcycl3729]

Numbers arnt there and too expensive, and training on them takes a long time

[@eddgar-ce3md]

"If they are so good," - that IS the reason. They are too good, we can't have Russia get any classified tech.

[@bonbonarobonbonarov1333]

If humanity invested all its military money on tech for better life ....

[@rickyal9810]

Wouldn't that be nice, however, we would be enslaved by the people who focused on military so here we are. Weakness only emboldens the aggressor.

[@darlof81312]

This plane is unbelievable, one of the best if not the best .

[@mattdecker2578]

Idk about the best.. but definitely a very effective and capable aircraft

[@itwoznotme]

why hide when you can just be bad arsed. for interceptor missions there is no need or use for stealth, especially so close to the border with russia. i also believe that stealth comes with big costs in what can be done in the close in fighting. these planes will be around for a fair while.

[@Bob10009]

Tell that to a Raptor pilot, they like a laugh 😂

[@biddyboy1570]

Some big words there. Can you simplify and add some pictures in crayon for the Army?

[@Emily-fw5hk]

“Minimum collateral damage” -> worldwide nuclear Armageddon

[@northernhardcore.7899]

Let me guess.- 1) Good long range/endurance on task. 2) Large array of state of the art weaponry carried. 3) State of the Art COMMS suite enabling 2-way COMMS with anybody, anywhere. 4) An internally mounted cannon for issuing warning shots on encounter. 5) A Highly manoeuvrable flight envelope tailor made for aggressive air combat with state of the art adversaries. 6) An ability to deliver precision guided munitions with literally pin point accuracy. 7) An ability to receive & share tactical information with AWACS, TACAMO & ground based 3i & 5i Ground Stations. So why don’t you develop the 2-seater for Ground Attack with conformal fuel tanks blended into the upper wing surface/fuselage joining. And reinstate TFR from the Tornado?

[@Bob10009]

Because two seats aren’t needed, most of them aren’t even used for training anymore and TFR is pretty much redundant now. Even the Tornado stopped flying low level missions over Iraq due to losses. Once you have air superiority, it’s far safer to sit at 10,000ft dropping LGB or launch stand off weapons like Stormshadow. The Tornadoes low level deep Penetration mission was designed purely for penetrating 1980’s era Russian air defences and was always expected to be a one way trip for most of the aircraft.

[@northernhardcore.7899]

@@Bob10009 thanks Bob re:TFR I agree but low level flying skills shouldn’t be dropped from the RAF’s war role training, but I think there’s a case for building more 2-seat Typhoons with conformal tanks for longer un-refuelled range with new generation of low-drag, higher yield warhead, LGB/GPS guided munitions or cruise missiles. I suppose, looking at the F-35 & their training is Grounschool-Sims (Basic EFT, Type Conv., Weapons/Advanced FT)- Single Seat War Machine. Adapt Typhoon Sims & Training to F-35 standards & release the 2-seaters for dedicated strike enhancement/mini-AWACS/Battle Management conversions.

[@Bob10009]

@@northernhardcore.7899 The simulators are so good that F-35 simply doesn’t need a two seat training version and Typhoon is the same. New Pilots only get a ride in the twin tubs because we already had them but are needed so little that they will probably disappear soon. They are all older airframes anyway so are already 20 years old. With modern flight systems, a pilot doesn’t need a back seater and that will only become more so with the likes of Tempest in the future, where the aircraft will do many of current pilots tasks automatically. Pilots used to have to work hard just keeping an aircraft in the air and needed a back seater for weapons deployment, navigation etc. Now, Typhoon will fly itself, has carefree handling and computers take care of navigation, weapon trajectories etc. I agree that conformal tanks on Typhoon would be good but the single seater can do the role just fine. Again, there is no need for TFR and having a continually emitting radar is not a good idea as it allows you to be easily detected. With the vast range of short to medium range air defences around now, it’s virtual suicide. The RAF Typhoons are back training in the low flying training areas but that is probably more to do with air combat use than ground attack roles. Dodging behind terrain is still a good way to break a radar or missiles lock on you….

[@aker9046]

Whatever, don't give them out for free. Otherwise, we'll see you in the next election.

[@michaelq77]

China likes this

[@georgegeorgakopoulos5956]

In Forces News We Trust

[@monkeyboy8424]

The RAF has no business in this region or in Zelensky's war. Russia has every right to protect itself from NATO expansion and potential aggression.

[@WhateverMan35]

Why RAF Typhoons are ideal for defending Nato airspace next to Russia? Because you have to justify a multi-bliion pound project.

[@nonomnismoriar9601]

I think the case for highly advanced and capable weapon systems is made on the news everyday.... The more expensive the better so the enemy is less likely to have similar capabilities and it WILL ALSO generate more revenue for the country when we solidify our international partnerships by selling weapons systems to our friends, old and new. And trust me that if less friendly people come knocking you'd much prefer someone greeting them with a Paveway from 40,000ft than you with a bayonet, in a trench fighting at 6ft like they are doing in Ukraine at the moment. You'd much prefer to be at home, writing comments on YT being kept warm by your own sense of smug self-righteousness

[@WhateverMan35]

@@nonomnismoriar9601 Somebody woke-up on the wrong side of bed.

[@nonomnismoriar9601]

@@WhateverMan35 nah, not really, I just like telling it the way it is - especially when I'm so consistently 100% right I remember people and politicians with the same arguments in the 90's saying we didn't need the Eurofighter as Russia wasn't a threat anymore, we were all going to be amazing friends and it was too expensive... At what price would you sell your piece of mind?!?

[@WhateverMan35]

@@nonomnismoriar9601 "especially when I'm so consistently 100% right" You'd much prefer to be at home, writing comments on YT being kept warm by your own sense of smug self-righteousness.

[@johnallen7807]

To paraphrase "Freedom isn't free" If you knew any history you would understand that!