Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Navy aircraft UK carrier will be sold after three years, no jets.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    You forgot Brazilians & Indians.
    Neither operate any conventional aircraft off carriers at the moment. The Brazilians don't have any operational A-4s - apparently they haven't conducted flight ops since 2005. The only Indian carrier in service is a STOVL carrier (Vikraat - formerly the Hermes), but the two they're building are STOBAR (the INS Vikramaditya - try saying that after a few pints - will enter service later this year and the first Vikrant ship will comission in 2014). Two very capable ships, and more on the way.

    On the bright side, if the F-35B doesn't work out, the RN can always buy Mig-29K or Tejas and run those off the ski jump ...

    Comment


    • #92
      Wittering still has a Harrier as a gate guardian (as of 18:45 today) if there's none left in the hangers can they clone the gate guardian ??

      Comment


      • #93
        So - does this mean that these aircraft will be capable of flying off smaller platforms eg HMS Ocean, RFA Argus, any large container ship taken up from trade a la Atlantic Conveyor? If so, is that a plus point for the purchase of these things?

        Also - am I right in saying that these (F35-B) will be the eventual replacement for RAF Tornado, and so could operate (as Harrier did) from remote sites?

        Does that capability balance up the loss of payload etc?

        Or am I talking crap...I have been known to in the past...
        'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by spider View Post
          So - does this mean that these aircraft will be capable of flying off smaller platforms eg HMS Ocean, RFA Argus, any large container ship taken up from trade a la Atlantic Conveyor? If so, is that a plus point for the purchase of these things?

          Also - am I right in saying that these (F35-B) will be the eventual replacement for RAF Tornado, and so could operate (as Harrier did) from remote sites?

          Does that capability balance up the loss of payload etc?...
          depends. a bit...

          in terms of a very basic 'land, refuel, piss off' capability then Ocean, Albion, Bulwark and RFA Argus (maybe even a Bay class LPD?) could do a job - not a good job, but better than a $150m+ airframe-ditching-in-the-sea job. however, everything i've heard about JSF says its going to be a fussy bastard: this is not an aircraft you could operate from a strip of motorway, or perhaps in comparrison with the Harrier, a bit of PSP at Port San Carlos in 1982 or the bombsite that was Kandahar Airfield in 2001. it looks to me like its version of 'austere basing' is RAF Lossiemouth or a purpose built Aircraft Carrier.

          F-35B is not technically a Tornado replacement, but we all know that it will be the aircraft that does the GR4 role of blowing shit up on the Ground while Typhoon blows shit up in the Air - its undoubtedly better as a deep penetration strike aircraft than Tornado because its stealthy, because it can self-escort, and it can take 2x 1000lb JDAM's internally. however, in terms of being a CAS platform i think its on shaky ground: its too expensive to risk - and certainly it'll be at the same risk as non-stealthy platforms when you nail two external fuel tanks, a gun pod, and a couple of Brimstones/EPWIV's to the outside - and there won't be enough of them to do the CAS role.

          Comment


          • #95
            With a U turn like this, surely it's not to late to ask the USMC for the Harriers back ....PLEASE!

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by Pure Hover View Post
              With a U turn like this, surely it's not to late to ask the USMC for the Harriers back ....PLEASE!
              we can ask, but they've already put them to good use retiring a number of utterly shagged out F/A-18 units. that ship has sailed - and even if it hadn't, with only Ocean and Lusty in service we don't have the number of decks required to have one in service on a 24/7 basis - moreover, Ocean and Apache have shown themselves to be very handy indeed, and without AMRAAM, Harrier GR9 is just a faster AH-64. so why bother?

              Comment


              • #97
                well - if it fails as a fighter / bomber - we can always use it to remove stubborn road markings:

                RGJ

                ...Once a Rifleman - Always a Rifleman... Celer et Audax

                The Rifles

                Comment


                • #98
                  I'm trying as usual to see the positives in this...

                  Are HMG now saying that with savings made by reverting back to this aircraft that both carriers will be commissioned?
                  'History is a vast early warning system'. Norman Cousins

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by spider View Post
                    I'm trying as usual to see the positives in this...

                    Are HMG now saying that with savings made by reverting back to this aircraft that both carriers will be commissioned?
                    No, but they will not have to cut benefits for potential voters with an election starting to loom on the horizon...
                    'He died who loved to live,' they'll say,
                    'Unselfishly so we might have today!'
                    Like hell! He fought because he had to fight;
                    He died that's all. It was his unlucky night.
                    http://www.salamanderoasis.org/poems...nnis/luck.html

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by spider View Post
                      I'm trying as usual to see the positives in this...

                      Are HMG now saying that with savings made by reverting back to this aircraft that both carriers will be commissioned?
                      yes, they reckon that to keep the extra carrier in service in the STOV/L configuration will cost about £60m per year - and thats just too cheap not to go for. the plan (and yes, its an MOD plan...) is that one ship will be available with the other in re-fit/training/laid-up. this is, it must be said, one of the weaknesses of the CTOL plan - that with one carrier, the re-fit/training cycle meant that we'd only really have a qualified air-group for perhaps 6 months of the year - hence the importance of the partnership with the French. while the F-35B is a 'lesser beast' than the F-35C, having two carriers instead of one does mean that there will always be one available - and 'pretty good' 7 days a week is a damn sight better than 'perfect' 3.5 days a week and sweet fanny adams the rest of the time.

                      it is, imv, a very good decision for the next 20 years - but then it falls down. without CTOL we're not going to be able to put a decent AEW/AWACS platform or a high-end UCAV on the boat as things currently stand. of course, tech moves on, and its possible that in 2030 we'll be able to launch a 48hr duration UAV with a mini-SAMPSON radar from the carrier, in which case we'll be sorted.

                      Comment


                      • Flight deck sections departing Cammel Laird




                        Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                        Comment


                        • Yet another snag.



                          Defence Secretary told to shut Portsmouth dockyard





                          Review calls for delay in £5bn warship programme, putting 3,000 jobs under threat
                          Philip Hammond, the Defence Secretary, has been told that the historic Portsmouth Dockyard should be shut down and the supercarrier warship programme delayed in a report he commissioned into the future of British shipbuilding.


                          The recommendations could put up to 3,000 jobs on the south coast at risk, while the second of the 65,000-tonne £5bn supercarriers would be delivered at least two years later than planned to sustain workload at defence giant BAE Systems' other dockyards.

                          The move would be a massive blow for Portsmouth, which can trace its naval roots back to the early 13th century and was where the Mary Rose was built in 1509.

                          BAE is sensitive over the likely closure of a dockyard, having come under fire from workers and politicians over job losses in Brough, North Yorkshire, and the shutdown of the 165-year-old Vickers Armstrong factory in Newcastle. However, The Independent on Sunday revealed in January that BAE had hired LEK Consulting to examine the future of Portsmouth and two dockyards on the River Clyde.

                          BAE was concerned that work would dry up once the second supercarrier, the Prince of Wales, was launched in 2018, with the Type 26 Global Combat Ship programme not commencing until 2020.

                          Following this news, the Ministry of Defence asked Admiral Sir Robert Walmsley, a former chief of defence procurement, to look into the supercarrier programme. Sir Robert's report is now sitting on Mr Hammond's desk and forms a major chunk of the defence department's value-for-money review of its biggest projects.

                          Under the terms of a 15-year agreement struck with BAE's shipbuilding arm in 2009, the department would have to cover the cost of any dockyard closure, while it has also guaranteed £230m of shipbuilding and support work a year. A Whitehall source said that the report showed there will soon be "excess capacity" in Britain's shipbuilding industry, and that it had listed four BAE dockyards in order of risk of shutdown.

                          The 169-acre Barrow-in-Furness shipyard – not thought to be included in LEK's assessment – was "bound to survive … as it can build anything", which includes submarines. Scotstoun and Govan in Scotland were also likely to be safe, while Portsmouth is "vulnerable".

                          "If they don't shut something the shipyards will be inefficient, we all have to face up to that," said the source, who added work would still be needed to prevent workers kicking their heels ahead of the Type 26 programme. "They might want to keep the Prince of Wales carrier building programme running, as you can't improve efficiency without a market."

                          An MoD spokesperson said: "The current Government asked the new Chief of Defence Materiel to review all of our major projects to assess progress and value for money. Sir Robert Walmsley's report is part of this process and the department will consider its findings in detail."

                          Referring to the LEK report, a BAE Systems spokesperson said: "As part of our business planning activity, we are reviewing how best to retain the capability to deliver and support complex warships in the UK in the future."



                          Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                          Comment


                          • it would be politically very difficult to delay the carrier programme any further - one of the reasons Hammond gave for the cancellation of F-35C and going back to the 'B' was that the 'C' and Cat and Traps involved an unacceptable time-lapse over the STOVL 'B' of 3 additional years to get back into carrier strike operations. he can hardly then announce that carrier strike will be put back another 2-3 years to make BAES's life easier.

                            if the £230m per year figure is accurate - then instead of paying the buggers to twiddle their thumbs just order another T45 and use the test-bed SAMPSON to fit it. same (ish..) cost, but with one more ship out of the deal...

                            Comment


                            • The Superblocks are starting to look ship like.









                              Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                              Comment




                              • On Sunday November 4, 2012, LB04, the largest section of HMS Queen Elizabeth, left Govan by barge.

                                The section was constructed at BAE Systems' Govan yard and transported to Babcock's Rosyth facility, where the carriers are being assembled.


                                Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X