JasonC Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Not like it was in the days of the mighty Hawker Hunter and Supermarine Swift, both combat ready the moment they were declared operational. Ha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truro Model Builder Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Not like it was in the days of the mighty Hawker Hunter and Supermarine Swift, both combat ready the moment they were declared operational. Yeah, yeah, alright. But I'm still right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-32 Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 But you know that in forty or so years time when it gets phased out we'll all be moaning about the replacement and its lack of character Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomastmcc Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 They plan to be operational from 2019. Two squadrons at RAAF Williamtown (NSW), one at RAAF Tindal (NT) and one at RAAF Amberley (QLD). 100 airframes in total. thanks ... be interesting doing a model up as an aussie .. thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westie7 Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Still stinks of Yak-38 design to me, and we all know what was said of deadlift engines back then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Could be worse http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rYyRx5Eh45o Trevor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gengriz Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Could be worse http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rYyRx5Eh45o Trevor Is that a licence built Fairey Delta with a lift engine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Is that a licence built Fairey Delta with a lift engine? No it's a really stuffed up Mirage called the Balzac, with a large number of Rolls Royce lift engines (remember the Pegasus was a Bristol engine and therefore 'the enemy'). Trevor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dambuster Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 No it's a really stuffed up Mirage called the Balzac, with a large number of Rolls Royce lift engines (remember the Pegasus was a Bristol engine and therefore 'the enemy'). Trevor I think the Fairey Delta comment was in reference to the belief that the French 'acquired' information on the Fairey Delta and engineered the Mirage along the same lines... Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PLC1966 Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 (edited) Sorry Gents, Cats and Traps with the F-35 is the way we should be going in the short term IMHO. And that the lack of this is a big error from the UK. But I believe we should be going F-35. This lump of money is being spent on a 5th Gen attack aircraft that will be in service for 40 years. We spend that money on Rafale, how old will the design be at the end of 40 years service....60 years old I would guess (although it works for the B-52 I guess..... ) Gripen for RAF & Rafale for Navy, I understand the Air Enviroment are picking up the costs for the jets and the Maritime for the boats, there will be no appetite in the Air world for two lots of jets. So I guess it depends what we want to do as a nation, in the near future If we want to get involved in punch-ups alongside the big boys on day one of a conflict , the F-35 will be the only game in town. Edited April 4, 2014 by PLC1966 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMK Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 They plan to be operational from 2019. Two squadrons at RAAF Williamtown (NSW), one at RAAF Tindal (NT) and one at RAAF Amberley (QLD). 100 airframes in total. 72 is the number being touted as 'threshold' (please don't buy any less than this) with 100 being 'objective' (we'd really like 100, despite no operational analysis to support that number). Time will tell. Only 14 have been approved by the government as of now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomastmcc Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 72 is the number being touted as 'threshold' (please don't buy any less than this) with 100 being 'objective' (we'd really like 100, despite no operational analysis to support that number). Time will tell. Only 14 have been approved by the government as of now. so what squadrons would get them first ??.. thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntPhillips Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 The biggest issue with fitting cats to the new carriers is as they are gas turbine powered, there is no steam for traditional steam cats, the French and US carriers are nuclear powered and have plenty of steam available. The US & UK are developing magnetic cats but there are huge development delays and costs have risen accordingly. I wouldn't be surprised if that is the major reason behind the decision to go back to the STOVL route a few years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Didn't someone say previously that there would also need to be a major redesign of the carriers to accommodate a cat and trap system as there is no infrastructure built in to the design. Trevor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PLC1966 Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Ant, I think you are right there. And wasn't the facility to have them fitted supposed to have been included in the original design, but BAe, when asked to look at making changes to the design to actually make it happen (When the Tories/Libs first come to power), came back with a massive cost for re-design and it got scrubbed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truro Model Builder Posted April 5, 2014 Share Posted April 5, 2014 I'm sure that the only reason we are still getting the carriers is because the contract was so well sewn up that it would have cost too much to cancel them. Which doesn't mean of course that we will maintain two of them in commission. I think the first one will be mothballed when the second one arrives, and is likely to be sold. How that would have affected our buy of F-35s is interesting. I suspect we would have switched to the F-35A, to be operated by the RAF only. As to numbers, well that's anyone's guess, though I would be surprised if we now go above the current commitment for 48 F-35Bs. That's about the same number of Sea Harriers we had at any one time to keep 800, 801 and 899 in business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magwitch Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 (edited) so what squadrons would get them first ??.. thomas 3 Squadron at Williamtown is going to be the first. The other F/A-18A squadrons will follow - 2 OCU, 75 and 77. 3 have the "Southern Cross" tails which will look pretty cool. Edited April 6, 2014 by magwitch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomastmcc Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 thanks magwitch helps me for decals... thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeVi Tophatter Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 These F-35 kits coming out have very plain markings... I'll be buying a few 1/72 F-35A/C's to do some 'what if?' markings... As a rather simple person, I find it hard to understand why so many nations are 'investing' in this particular 'jack of all trades' aircraft of sorts. Apart form this low observability marketing, how much difference would there be between an F-35A and an F-16E/F Block 60/62 operationally? Without inflaming opinions, why does Australia need an aircraft carrier? If it's to put themselves on a level pegging with the new Chinese Carrier/J-15 combo, then surely using a conventional Aircraft Carrier with the Super Hornets they already have make a great deal more sense than anything else... Thanks for any info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 I'm still struggling to come to terms with someone calling an aircraft a Balzac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeVi Tophatter Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 I'm still struggling to come to terms with someone calling an aircraft a Balzac. ??? Had to Boogle that one. Balzac, Balzup more like... Just joking. Much like the British supersonic VTOL project it was pretty interesting but just a bit too ambitious. F-35. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomastmcc Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 These F-35 kits coming out have very plain markings... I'll be buying a few 1/72 F-35A/C's to do some 'what if?' markings... As a rather simple person, I find it hard to understand why so many nations are 'investing' in this particular 'jack of all trades' aircraft of sorts. Apart form this low observability marketing, how much difference would there be between an F-35A and an F-16E/F Block 60/62 operationally? Without inflaming opinions, why does Australia need an aircraft carrier? If it's to put themselves on a level pegging with the new Chinese Carrier/J-15 combo, then surely using a conventional Aircraft Carrier with the Super Hornets they already have make a great deal more sense than anything else... Thanks for any info. levi australia doesnt have any aircraft carriers and isnt getting any mate ,if you mean the new canberra class ships the RAN is getting they are actually LPH = landing platform helicopter assault ships .. thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMK Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 Thomas, they're LHD, not LPH. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeVi Tophatter Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Thanks for the info Thomas and GMK, did a bit of homework too. So the Aussies will be using the F-35A to replace the legacy Hornets and possibly the 'stop gap' Super Hornets over time. I was under the wrong impression the RAN was going to use the F-35B to operate off smaller 'Amphibious Assault Carriers'! Without being political and as a nobody, a Royal Air Force F-35A/Royal Navy (FAA) F-35C deal seems more effective as both of these variants appear to be much less compromised than the F-35B. Plus you could have other 'assets' aboard a more conventional Aircraft Carrier, such as something to air refuel the F-35C, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shane Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) levi australia doesnt have any aircraft carriers and isnt getting any mate ,if you mean the new canberra class ships the RAN is getting they are actually LPH = landing platform helicopter assault ships .. thomas LHD - Landing Helicopter Dock. There is a subtle difference in role. Shane (Edit. Rats, sorry Greg, I should have read ahead) Edited April 7, 2014 by Shane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now