"Tony Williams" wrote:
| "Brett" wrote in message
...
| "Tony Williams" wrote:

...

| | It was clear that when Boeing decided in
| | favour of the BK 27 in 1999, the GAU-12/U WAS in the frame,
because GD
| | withdrew it from the JSF competition in 2000, just before L-M
selected
| | the BK 27 as well (which looks very much like a case of 'resign
before
| | you're sacked').
|
| Or it could be that GD believed the "press" on how effective the BK
27
| was. The evaluation by LMT after the JSF contract award would appear
to
| have determined that the BK 27 wasn't that great an advance and that
the
| GAU-12/U was just as effective.
|
| You think that a company like GD would withdraw from a competition
| because they're frightened of the opposition's press releases? That's
| not my perception of US business attitudes.

Well that would depend on what they believed the actual requirements
were for the weapon and the "press" (from Boeing) on how well the BK 27
met those requirements.

| Can you point me please to the source for the statement that "the BK
| 27 wasn't that great an advance and that the GAU-12/U was just as
| effective".

The term used by Burbage was "comparable in technical performance" and
was part of this section of a Defense Daily article.

__Burbage emphasized that both the BK 27 and GAU-12 were able to meet
JSF's lethality requirements, which include probability of kill and
accuracy. He said the GAU-12, which has a higher rate of fire than the
BK 27, was able to meet the requirement by putting more rounds on the
target.
"Performance and affordability are equally important in our selection
process," Burbage said. "If we have two candidates that are comparable
in technical performance, but have significant differences in terms of
affordability, we will pick the one that is more affordable."

Burbage also said there were more technical negatives against the BK 27
than the GAU-12. Cost in three areas, unit recurring fly-away cost,
ammunition, and operational support, tilted the decision in favor of the
GAU-12, he said.

"In all three areas, there was a benefit to the GAU-12," Burbage said.__

see: http://stage.defensedaily.com/VIP/dd...ddi1122.htm#A3

| I'm trying to sort out the facts of what happened here amongst the
| usual forum smoke and mirrors. I mean, the arguments are fun but I do
| prefer them to lead to some daylight.

Wasn't "ammunition, and operational support" behind of the RAF's
"government problems" with the Typhoon BK 27 installation.