BAE Systems will supply 24 Typhoon fighter jets to Qatar, preserving thousands of British manufacturing jobs in the biggest export deal for the Typhoon project in a decade.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/17/uk-signs-deal-qatar-24-typhoon-jets-boost-bae/

A boost for the aircraft and for UK jobs. A somewhat unexpected announcement at this time.

Gingersnap wrote:

BAE Systems will supply 24 Typhoon fighter jets to Qatar, preserving thousands of British manufacturing jobs in the biggest export deal for the Typhoon project in a decade.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/17/uk-signs-deal-qatar-24-typhoon-jets-boost-bae/

A boost for the aircraft and for UK jobs. A somewhat unexpected announcement at this time.

Well that is a surprise...

So we now have Qatar acquiring 24 Rafales, 36 F-15s and now 24 Eurofighters. That is a lot of aircraft for a nation that, before the Rafale order, had one squadron of Mirage 2000s, about 15 aircraft.

Ozair wrote:

Gingersnap wrote:

BAE Systems will supply 24 Typhoon fighter jets to Qatar, preserving thousands of British manufacturing jobs in the biggest export deal for the Typhoon project in a decade.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/17/uk-signs-deal-qatar-24-typhoon-jets-boost-bae/

A boost for the aircraft and for UK jobs. A somewhat unexpected announcement at this time.

Well that is a surprise...

So we now have Qatar acquiring 24 Rafales, 36 F-15s and now 24 Eurofighters. That is a lot of aircraft for a nation that, before the Rafale order, had one squadron of Mirage 2000s, about 15 aircraft.

After the recent tensions with Saudi Arabia, do you really blame them for hedging their bets? The F-16 sale is looking very uncertain right now, according to a few people I know in the business - buying European (who aren't as badly swayed by SA as the US can be) is just good sense, and buying multiple options is just really good sense ATM.

moo wrote:

After the recent tensions with Saudi Arabia, do you really blame them for hedging their bets?

Not sure this acquisition would change much. Qatar has 32k military personnel while Saudi Arabia has close to 15 times that number. If the Saudis want into Qatar a few additional Eurofighters will make little difference.

moo wrote:

The F-16 sale is looking very uncertain right now, according to a few people I know in the business - buying European (who aren't as badly swayed by SA as the US can be) is just good sense, and buying multiple options is just really good sense ATM.

Assume you mean F-15?

The US has a long term military presence in Qatar including the Centcom CAOC that will reside there for many years. I can't see any SA influence on the US directly impacting those types of facilities. Perhaps it impacts acquisition projects but that would be a knee jerk reaction.

That is a surprise.

Ozair wrote:

moo wrote:

After the recent tensions with Saudi Arabia, do you really blame them for hedging their bets?

Not sure this acquisition would change much. Qatar has 32k military personnel while Saudi Arabia has close to 15 times that number. If the Saudis want into Qatar a few additional Eurofighters will make little difference.

That is maximising the cost of such an attack. Same with North Korea versus the US/South Korea. So the Typhoons would make quite a difference.

I love with how much emphasis media use "Typhoon" instead of "Eurofighter"...

Jayafe wrote:

I love with how much emphasis media use "Typhoon" instead of "Eurofighter"...

It is the Eurofighter Typhoon, so why are you surprised by this?

Dutchy wrote:

Jayafe wrote:

I love with how much emphasis media use "Typhoon" instead of "Eurofighter"...

It is the Eurofighter Typhoon, so why are you surprised by this?

I find interesting that not a single UK media I have read publishing the note uses one single time the word "Eurofighter", I thought I was being quite clear

Jayafe wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Jayafe wrote:

I love with how much emphasis media use "Typhoon" instead of "Eurofighter"...

It is the Eurofighter Typhoon, so why are you surprised by this?

I find interesting that not a single UK media I have read publishing the note uses one single time the word "Eurofighter", I thought I was being quite clear

Because the UK normally refers to it as Typhoon, and has done since forever. Don't bother digging up controversy where none exists.

It's quite simple, this name thing, Eurofighter is the consortium formed to develop the aircraft.
The aircraft being named Typhoon later on.
And there is a precedent;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panavia_Aircraft_GmbH

After the Panavia project was named the Tornado no one called it 'The Panavia' anymore.

GDB wrote:

It's quite simple, this name thing, Eurofighter is the consortium formed to develop the aircraft.
The aircraft being named Typhoon later on.
And there is a precedent;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panavia_Aircraft_GmbH

After the Panavia project was named the Tornado no one called it 'The Panavia' anymore.

( full name was "Panavia 200 Tornado" shortened over time to Tornado

Nice theory.
But IMHO in this case wrong.

Doesn't take away from how the plane is talked about :
UK :: Typhoon
DE :: Eurofighter ( Typhoon added on occasion )
FR :: Eurofighter

just go over and google for it.

I could see reasons why the Germans may not love referring to it as the Typhoon.

It's an interesting order for that county. They are basically buying from all western sources now. A good way to spread influence and distribute political risk. Seems like a lot of fighters for a country that sized.

WIederling wrote:

Doesn't take away from how the plane is talked about :
UK :: Typhoon
DE :: Eurofighter ( Typhoon added on occasion )
FR :: Eurofighter

just go over and google for it.

I don't see why France should be considered here. They aren't an EF2000 partner.

And FYI, when Germany tried to sell it in the rigged Danish competition, they referred to it as the Typhoon.

moo wrote:

Ozair wrote:

So we now have Qatar acquiring 24 Rafales, 36 F-15s and now 24 Eurofighters. That is a lot of aircraft for a nation that, before the Rafale order, had one squadron of Mirage 2000s, about 15 aircraft.

After the recent tensions with Saudi Arabia, do you really blame them for hedging their bets? The F-15 sale is looking very uncertain right now, according to a few people I know in the business - buying European (who aren't as badly swayed by SA as the US can be) is just good sense, and buying multiple options is just really good sense ATM.

Aviation Week just ran an article on the Typhoon order suggesting that it was placed to improve political ties with the UK, just as the F-15QA order would do with the United States and the Rafale order would with France. Also, by choosing aircraft from the UK, the US and France, they insulate themselves from changing future political climates as it is unlikely all three countries would be simultaneously displeased with Qatar. And Qatar has the money to afford the three types and pay for the complications involved in integrating them all into their air forces.

It's amazing how some countries can take *snap* decisions on military procurement while some others like India take decades evaluating several types of aircraft and end up with none.

In this context, Qatar has Rafales and Typhoons - India was looking at both, zeroed in on the Rafale years later, and the current status is unclear.

Spiderguy252 wrote:

It's amazing how some countries can take *snap* decisions on military procurement while some others like India take decades evaluating several types of aircraft and end up with none.

In this context, Qatar has Rafales and Typhoons - India was looking at both, zeroed in on the Rafale years later, and the current status is unclear.

Aren't India taking 36 Rafale's build in France? And the IAF is now pitching the government for 36 more (at 60% price of the first 36) http://thediplomat.com/2017/08/indias-a ... om-france/

Dutchy wrote:

Spiderguy252 wrote:

It's amazing how some countries can take *snap* decisions on military procurement while some others like India take decades evaluating several types of aircraft and end up with none.

In this context, Qatar has Rafales and Typhoons - India was looking at both, zeroed in on the Rafale years later, and the current status is unclear.

Aren't India taking 36 Rafale's build in France? And the IAF is now pitching the government for 36 more (at 60% price of the first 36) http://thediplomat.com/2017/08/indias-a ... om-france/

It's talk and has continued for years.

Give me a ping when the first Rafale in IAF colours springs up, while tiny states like Qatar inducts types for fun despite facing little or no security threats.

Spiderguy252 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Spiderguy252 wrote:

It's amazing how some countries can take *snap* decisions on military procurement while some others like India take decades evaluating several types of aircraft and end up with none.

In this context, Qatar has Rafales and Typhoons - India was looking at both, zeroed in on the Rafale years later, and the current status is unclear.

Aren't India taking 36 Rafale's build in France? And the IAF is now pitching the government for 36 more (at 60% price of the first 36) http://thediplomat.com/2017/08/indias-a ... om-france/

It's talk and has continued for years.

Give me a ping when the first Rafale in IAF colours springs up, while tiny states like Qatar inducts types for fun despite facing little or no security threats.

2019 apparently, hope I don't forget it by then

Just kidding, I understand it is quite frustrating these processes, especially in India it seems.

Spiderguy252 wrote:

It's amazing how some countries can take *snap* decisions on military procurement while some others like India take decades evaluating several types of aircraft and end up with none.

Easy to do when as a government you have essentially no opposition and no real concept of public money.

Spiderguy252 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Spiderguy252 wrote:

It's amazing how some countries can take *snap* decisions on military procurement while some others like India take decades evaluating several types of aircraft and end up with none.

In this context, Qatar has Rafales and Typhoons - India was looking at both, zeroed in on the Rafale years later, and the current status is unclear.

Aren't India taking 36 Rafale's build in France? And the IAF is now pitching the government for 36 more (at 60% price of the first 36) http://thediplomat.com/2017/08/indias-a ... om-france/

It's talk and has continued for years.

Give me a ping when the first Rafale in IAF colours springs up, while tiny states like Qatar inducts types for fun despite facing little or no security threats.

Um, it's a firm contract and the jets are in production. No false starts on this anymore. Once GoI pays out cash, they cannot *not* take delivery, the government auditor would raise cain.

WIederling wrote:

Spiderguy252 wrote:

Give me a ping when the first Rafale in IAF colours springs up, while tiny states like Qatar inducts types for fun despite facing little or no security threats.

you have that reversed.
India has no security threat beyond some cosmetic breast beating cat warlks
near the Pakistani border.

You seem to have forgotten about the PRC. Not to mention a somewhat over-simplified view of geo-politics.

Nobody bases their security calculus off of best case and good wishes.

Don't mind me though, I just happen to interact with these people on a daily basis.

GDB wrote:

... the aircraft still was formally named the Typhoon, a longer gestation period compared to the Tornado meant development aircraft had been flying for years called, as you say, Eurofighters. Whereas it was a Tornado when the first prototype of that aircraft first flew in 1974.

Is that absolutely correct? In my youth I clearly recall the type initially referred to as the Panavia MRCA, or sometimes just as the "MRCA". If you want a link, I can point you at a copy of Flight International dated May 1975. The Tornado name came along later.
By the way, I am reliably informed that MRCA stood for "Mother Reilly's Cardboard Aeroplane", or was it "Must Refurbish Canberra...Again"

GDB wrote:

The original Typhoon was a WW2 British aircraft, designed to replace the Hurricane, it was not a great air combat aircraft but was a lethal ground attack type, which took a heavy toll of enemy (that is German) ground forces, especially after D-Day.

But you haven't mentioned the original Tornado? That was another product of Hawker that seems to have been quietly forgotten by (almost) everyone. Never mind eight-gun fighters, this one would have carried twelve (12!) .303 Brownings., but it was let down by the Vulture engine. Ultimately it worked out for the best because the failure of the Vulture engine persuaded Avro to abandon it's twin-Vulture engine design (the Manchester) in favour of a four engine (Merlin) version. You can probably guess what that was called.

SheikhDjibouti wrote:

GDB wrote:

... the aircraft still was formally named the Typhoon, a longer gestation period compared to the Tornado meant development aircraft had been flying for years called, as you say, Eurofighters. Whereas it was a Tornado when the first prototype of that aircraft first flew in 1974.

Is that absolutely correct? In my youth I clearly recall the type initially referred to as the Panavia MRCA, or sometimes just as the "MRCA". If you want a link, I can point you at a copy of Flight International dated May 1975. The Tornado name came along later.
By the way, I am reliably informed that MRCA stood for "Mother Reilly's Cardboard Aeroplane", or was it "Must Refurbish Canberra...Again"

GDB wrote:

The original Typhoon was a WW2 British aircraft, designed to replace the Hurricane, it was not a great air combat aircraft but was a lethal ground attack type, which took a heavy toll of enemy (that is German) ground forces, especially after D-Day.

But you haven't mentioned the original Tornado? That was another product of Hawker that seems to have been quietly forgotten by (almost) everyone. Never mind eight-gun fighters, this one would have carried twelve (12!) .303 Brownings., but it was let down by the Vulture engine. Ultimately it worked out for the best because the failure of the Vulture engine persuaded Avro to abandon it's twin-Vulture engine design (the Manchester) in favour of a four engine (Merlin) version. You can probably guess what that was called.

MRCA was the official project designation, from 1969. When Panavia was formed to make a multi role combat aircraft for the UK, West Germany and Italy.
I remember when the Airfix model kit of it came out, around the time the first prototype flew, they ran ads titled 'The Tornado That's Sweeping Europe'.
While you don't base things on model kits I'm pretty certain by the time the first prototype got airborne, it was named Tornado.
MRCA hardly trips off the tongue either.

Plus they would hardly name an ambitious new aircraft after a failed WW2 design, it's because it never or hardly entered service, so few were built, who remembers it?

GDB wrote:

MRCA was the official project designation, from 1969. When Panavia was formed to make a multi role combat aircraft for the UK, West Germany and Italy.
I remember when the Airfix model kit of it came out, around the time the first prototype flew, they ran ads titled 'The Tornado That's Sweeping Europe'.
While you don't base things on model kits I'm pretty certain by the time the first prototype got airborne, it was named Tornado.
MRCA hardly trips off the tongue either.

Plus they would hardly name an ambitious new aircraft after a failed WW2 design, it's because it never or hardly entered service, so few were built, who remembers it?

I'll take your second point first; I'm not suggesting that they named the new Tornado after the "failed WW2 design", merely that it was a coincidence. Are you now suggesting that they named the Eurofighter Typhoon after the successful WWII design? That is definitely news to me. I just thought that was a coincidence too. Since you mentioned one coincidence, I thought it was an oversight not to mention the other. That is all.

As for your first point; when did the Tornado name take over from the MRCA appellation? There could well have been a time when both names were in common use. But I did promise you a link if it was required, and so here is Flight International from January 1976, well over a year after the prototype flew. In fact it refers to MRCA P.06. (the sixth prototype)
https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFA ... 200049.PDF

I can find other references throughout 1975 to back this up, whereas I cannot find any mention of "Tornado" until Hansard dated 1977.

But ahead of all that, the clincher must be this little gem.
"In 1975 Airfix released the MRCA in kit form....".
Elsewhere it uses the name Tornado, but not in conjunction with the 1975 Airfix kit.
http://model-scale.com/panavia-tornado-gr4
I hope that brings back some memories for you, although the heading photo is actually from a more recent Revell kit.

I once found an aviation mag from 1973, not Flight International, a one off, it was still 'MRCA' then (and they were still talking about potential single cockpit and/or fixed wing versions too).
So really, around 1975 it seems to have been named Tornado, maybe unofficially at first then after it flew probably more in use.

Spiderguy252 wrote:

while some others like India take decades evaluating several types of aircraft and end up with none.

This sounds exactly like Canada! Maybe it's just a scheme to keep government officials employed while twiddling their fingers.

France owns 11,1% of Airbus and Airbus is an Eurofighter partner so there is some French involvement (and I'm sure, some French-made elements too).

Some significant financial risk associated with the UK selling the Eurofighter to Qatar. Qatar has enough money at the moment though that surly something could be worked out.

Deal to sell Typhoon fighters to Qatar risks 'billions of Exchequer funding', Treasury leak warns

A deal to sell Typhoon fighter jets to Qatar will require "unprecedented" support from the British taxpayer, a government document has warned.

Treasury officials expressed concern that underwriting the £6 billion deal risked “billions of Exchequer funding” if Qatar defaulted on the agreement.

The worries stem from an agreement Britain signed with Qatar in December to sell the Gulf nation 24 of the supersonic jets, along with a package of weapons, pilot training and maintenance.

Their assessment was that the transaction amounted to an unprecedented level of support to one buyer and risked “skewing” the portfolio of UK Export Finance (UKEF), the government’s credit agency, “by concentrating about...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/0 ... hoon-deal/

The only risk could be Qatar being caught in the Iran mess and getting some offshore accounts and/or transactions frozen. Unlikely, but with the hate some people have towards Iran and its allies it's not impossible.