>Please tell me why the Europoorfighter is shit apart from it being another overpriced and overdue design of a multi-national committee with its parts supply intentionally spread out to multiple (((EU))) members to increase bureaucracy coupled with the first production aircraft having to be scrapped in the long term due to totally-not-intentional parts incompatibility with later tranche
Apart from those things, it isn't shit. It's a super agile interceptor/fighter aircraft.
The only real downside is that, for some fucking reason, someone decided to use it as a multirole aircraft. It is not a multirole. It is an interceptor/fighter aircraft. It is meant to do exactly two things:
b) be super agile
c) kill enemy planes
And it excels at both.
It's retarded politicians going "We don't want to invest into a proper airforce. Can you make this thing do everything" and greedy companies going "Sure. It's gonna cost you though." A process that is internationally known as "fly-y die-y, give me money".
Seeing as this is the Eurofigher thread:
What few people know is that the pilot controls and the actual surfaces in the Eurofighter are entirely disconnected. The pilot doesn't control the plane anymore. He simply uses the joystick to give directions to the digital polit, which constantly checks airspeed, air density, humidity, fuel load, weapons load and temperature, checks those against a list of parameters and maximum possible G loads, and performs manouvers as best as possible.
This doesn't mean that the plane is impossible to stall though, but it's impossible to put the Eurofighter into an uncontrollable stall. Many of the manouvers the computer is capable of actually use stalling to get more performance out of the plane than a pilot would be able to, by riding the safe parameters to the most extreme limits. It's an amazing system, and I hope to see it used more in future planes (allthough all calculations will have to be redone, which will be expensive and cost a lot of money).