A military procurement nightmare: Britain's Typhoon fighter and its successor

 

In a long and very detailed article, Lewis Page argues that "Britain’s next-generation fighter jet is a disaster in the making".  He goes into detail on the background to the present project, and the aircraft that have preceded it in Royal Air Force service.  It's far too long an article to reproduce here, so I've selected as an example just one cost comparison between the current front-line aircraft of the US and UK air forces.

The Eurofighter Typhoon, as flown by the RAF, is the most expensive tactical aircraft ever built by the human race. When the last Tranche 1 planes are gone next year (disposed of with half their lifetime hours unused) the RAF will possess 107 aircraft.

Recent statements reveal that the size of an RAF front-line squadron has fallen from 12 to “up to 10” jets. Officials have recently congratulated themselves that they typically have “65 to 70” Typhoons “available” nowadays for the seven RAF front-line Typhoon squadrons that exist on paper.

Some more Typhoons are in the training and test units but it’s clear that others, probably more than 20, are in a long-term un-flyable condition: in deep maintenance, with parts robbed from them to get others flying, or both.

Each of the 107 Typhoons, according to the National Audit Office, cost well over £215m to obtain in 2011 money, or around $355m (£264m) if we use contemporary exchange rates.

By comparison, the undisputed, most powerful fighter jet in the world is the US Air Force’s F-22 Raptor. Only 183 Raptors were made in the end, as opposed to the 600-plus Eurofighters so far.

But despite this much shorter production run and the fact that it is an entire generation more advanced than a Typhoon, the acquisition cost of one Raptor to the US taxpayer was somewhat lower than the cost of one Typhoon to the UK taxpayer. The Raptor throws into stark relief the almost unbelievably bad value for money offered by the Typhoon.

In short, the Typhoon was a procurement disaster.

There's much more at the link.  Highly recommended reading for aviation and military enthusiasts.

The article helps us understand why military hardware has become so expensive.  The deadweight of bureaucratic and political control interfered so much with the Typhoon's development, and the lack of vision among military leaders in making it a single-purpose rather than a multi-role aircraft, effectively doomed it to operational irrelevance for much of its service life.  Furthermore, the astronomical costs of not just each aircraft, but spare parts to keep it flying, wasted so much of the Royal Air Force budget that funds were not available for different types of aircraft, or urgently needed upgrades.  (For example, for the past two decades almost every major frontline strike fighter has had AESA radar, offering vastly improved performance over older types:  but the RAF's Typhoons are only now beginning to get one - and, at that, only enough to fit to less than half the fleet.  Without it, if they had had to fight against other modern fighters, they would have been at a huge disadvantage.)

I suppose we could draw parallels between Britain's fighters and the US Navy's ships.  The USN has had so many problems developing new designs that it's had to scrap almost all of them as being too complex and/or too expensive, after its "experts" had spent years gold-plating them and adding every feature they could think of.  It's now been forced to bodge together a "frigate" that is basically a slightly more heavily armed Coast Guard cutter, because the much more sophisticated Constellation class frigates have had to be abandoned due to their design becoming bogged down in excessive complexity.  Will something similar happen to Britain's proposed new fighter aircraft?  I think there's a very good chance that it will.

China is producing new aircraft and ship designs in multiples every year, and building them by the dozens.  One hopes that both Britain and the USA will wake up to reality and start moving faster . . . but if the politicians insist on sticking their oar in, that's not very likely.  Can Secretary of War Hegseth cut through the entrenched bureaucracy and layers of control that have bedeviled US military design?  That remains to be seen.

Peter

Why we're getting poorer, and they're getting richer, all the time

 

That's the essence of a lengthy and very informative essay by Quoth The Raven.  Here are some extended excerpts.  They may look dauntingly long, but they're right on the money (you should pardon the expression) and are well worth reading.  If you're finding it hard to make ends meet, this is why.

The widening wealth inequality gap is the political third rail nobody in power truly ever wants to touch.

Politicians will scream at each other all day over taxes, healthcare, immigration, tariffs, student loans, climate policy, or whatever outrage is currently driving engagement on cable news and social media. But the second the conversation turns toward monetary policy, toward the machinery of money creation itself, the room suddenly gets very quiet.

That’s because monetary policy has quietly become the single most powerful force reshaping wealth distribution in modern America. And unlike the endless partisan theater surrounding fiscal policy, monetary intervention oddly enjoys remarkable bipartisan support.

Republicans and Democrats may pretend to be existential enemies on television, but when it comes to flooding the financial system with dollars, both parties reliably fall into line. And that support is precisely why this topic is politically radioactive: once people understand how the system works, the illusion of two competing economic ideologies starts to collapse. Republicans want less spending, Democrats want higher taxes…but both parties want the Fed to keep printing dollars.

. . .

Now we operate inside a permanently distorted financial system where trillions of dollars can be electronically created and injected into markets whenever instability appears. The market is no longer primarily driven by productivity or efficient allocation of capital. It is driven by liquidity. Price discovery has been replaced by intervention dependency and risk has been socialized while gains remain privatized.

And every time markets threaten to correct naturally, policymakers intervene to ensure asset prices do not fall far enough to inflict meaningful pain on the people who own the overwhelming majority of financial assets. And the consequences of this have been staggering.

While both parties bitch and moan about affordability, protecting the middle and lower class, and “equity”, one of the clearest signs of this Fed-created distortion is the explosive growth of the ultrawealthy class. According to The Wall Street Journal, there are now roughly 430,000 American households worth more than $30 million, including approximately 74,000 households worth over $100 million. The growth of these groups has dramatically outpaced overall population growth over the past several decades.

In other words, Fed policy, blessed by both political parties, is widening the wealth inequality gap both political parties claim to fighting against ... When it comes to purchasing power, we are literally taking from the poor, and giving to the rich.

. . .

Beneath the culture war circus exists a deeper bipartisan consensus: financial markets must remain inflated at all costs.

And the lower and middle class gets absolutely brutalized in this arrangement.

Historically, middle-class wealth accumulation depended on disciplined saving, stable employment, affordable housing, and gradual investment appreciation over time. But inflationary monetary regimes destroy the reliability of all of those pathways. Savings become punishment, cash becomes a melting ice cube, young people are forced into speculative assets (or outright becoming gambling addicts) simply to attempt to preserve purchasing power. Conservative investing gets punished while reckless leverage gets rewarded.

Entire generations now feel compelled to try and make quick money in markets not because they are greedy, but because monetary debasement has made traditional financial prudence nonviable. This creates an economy built less on productivity and innovation and more on asset inflation, debt expansion and outright speculation.

. . .

A market that cannot survive without permanent monetary life support is no longer a healthy market, it is a managed dependency system. A patient on hospice care. And every bailout pushes the reckoning further into the future while making the eventual consequences even worse.

There's more at the link.  It's a long article, but well worth reading in full.

My take-away from this article is that if every American took the time to read and understand it, we'd have a Second American Revolution almost overnight.  It's precisely because most Americans don't understand what is being done in their name by their political leaders (who are enriching themselves in the process, at our expense) that our current miserable monetary situation has been allowed to develop.  I fear that unless and until we kick out those responsible, it'll just go on until it collapses . . . but such a collapse would take us with it, and punish everybody, not just the guilty.

What can we do about it?  Elect a better class of politician, on both sides of the political divide.  Will we do that?  I fear too few of us care enough to make the attempt . . . and that's what our current politicians rely on to keep their place in the sun.

Peter

Memes that made me laugh 313

 

Gathered from around the Internet over the past week.  Click any image for a larger view.

Sunday morning music

 

Ever heard of Imad Fares?  I hadn't either, until I came across one of his video clips while surfing the Net.  On his YouTube channel, he writes:

I’m Imad Fares, a street musician based in Poland, sharing the passion of rumba flamenca, Latin rhythms, and soulful acoustic guitar.

On this channel, you’ll find powerful guitar covers, street performances, and short videos filled with rhythm, feeling, and fire.

My mission? To bring the magic of the Spanish guitar to the world — one performance at a time.

His video clips are mostly of him "busking" (playing on the streets of various cities), and his audiences' reactions to them.  Here are a few for your entertainment.

Foot-tapping stuff.

Peter

Not your average pizza joint

 

Foxes In Love strikes again!  Click the image to be taken to a larger version at the cartoon's Web page.

In my younger days (much younger...) I can recall competing with my squad mates to see which of us could come up with the most revolting combination of pizza toppings.  Needless to say, we never actually ordered them, but it had its lighter moments.  Limburger and pufferfish, anyone?

Peter