Muzz Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 BBC news reporting that the Prime Minister has confirmed that the Prince Of Wales will enter service rather than being sold or mothballed. Wonder if they'll both be at sea at the same time? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HP42 Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 D'yerknow I was only thinking about this the other day. I was saying to somebody that all an aggressor would need to do would be to wait until the carrier went in for servicing/refit and then invade (Falklands style). With another carrier available it covers any gaps. I'm actually nervous that we wont get a carrier into service for a while yet, can it be sped up? The world has become progressively more dangerous in recent years, I feel this carrier is most definitely needed. Just as an aside, I was looking at HMS QE the other day. It has no catapult, the F-35 being a VTOL job. Not wishing to get into the F-35 debate, I was going through a few 'what if' scenarios. If the F-35 proves its detractors wrong and becomes a superb aircraft, we're probably going to be fine for the next 20 years or so. After that who knows? If the F-35 proves to be a damp squib (and it may well be), and is weeded out long before time, then what? The carrier is a dead duck without a catapult. Lastly, the US have an AEW capability (Hawkeye). Have we learned the lessons of the Falklands or do we not have an AEW capability with these new carriers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Driver66 Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 I so glad we managed to get rid off all those harriers, that way the shinny new carrier won't get any nasty tyre marks on their pristine flight decks, well done David and Nick. Hope the F-35 gets it's act together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyot Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 Glad to hear that,.......I do hope that they see sense and fit it with catapults and arrester wires plus an air group of proper aeroplanes which actually work,.....maybe navalised Eurofighters or Hornets? Let the RAF keep the F-35 and equip the navy with some real naval fighters, Cheers Tony (who knows very well that what he has written won`t happen!) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Wilson Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 There won't be any catapults fitted, that was ruled out a couple of years ago when they reverted to the B model F-35 because the cost of modifying the ship was prohibitive. Anyway a navalised Typhoon would cost Billions and take decades. It took Boeing a decade to navalise the Hawk! As far as AEW is concerned the plan is to have a radar system "Crowsnest" that can be fitted to the Merlin HAS2. about ten radars will be bought and they should "plug-in" to any Merlin HAS2. There has been some talk of increasing the planned number of HAS2 from 30 by also upgrading some of the eight remaining airframes that would otherwise be retired. I expect the F-35B purchase won't increase and we'll see only one carrier operational at any one time, just like the Albion class assault ships. Stuart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 (edited) I think we have an agreement with the French Navy that we'll cover for each other when a carrier is in drydock. Edited September 6, 2014 by Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_modeller Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 If the Yanks ever sh*t-can the F-35B, we could string some trap wires across the deck, swallow our pride and buy Rafale and go STOBAR... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HP42 Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 If the Yanks ever sh*t-can the F-35B, we could string some trap wires across the deck, swallow our pride and buy Rafale and go STOBAR... In the short to medium term that may well do us proud. Trouble is we'd need the catapult as well. Quite what the longer term solution (10-20 years) would be is a mystery. I do wonder if technology will make the carrier obsolete in the same way the battleship went. Personally I think future missile technology will make carriers progressively more vulnerable over time to the extent where they can't be deployed without loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HP42 Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 (edited) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29075307 Here's the article. Strewth, we're still 8/9 years away from having capability. In the current climate I'd feel vulnerable with 8 to 9 months! If Scotland go independent then I do wonder how this could affect the 'mix'. We'd be relying on them to deliver...and after the possible bust ups (think messy divorce) they might not want to. Daft question on STOBAR with Rafale etc, you would need a catapult wouldn't you? There's no chance of taking a 'run up' at it WW2 style is there? Nah, surely not....? :-) EDIT: Answered own question, Wikipedia is a wonderful thing.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOBAR Edited September 6, 2014 by HP42 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magwitch Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Anyway a navalised Typhoon would cost Billions and take decades. It took Boeing a decade to navalise the Hawk! I can't believe this fantasy still gets wheeled out. It would easily take 15 years to get it operational and cost 300m+ per airframe. Apart from that the RN would have no way of keeping 3 carrier air wings CATOBAR qualified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 SU-35. No cat, only arrester wires. Range, payload, off the peg. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Team Aer Lingus Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Why hasn't anyone asked Hammond ( defence minister) why the the most Capable Maritime Patrol aircraft in the British Isles are the Irish Air Corps two Casa's Lost Nimrod's & Harriers surely time to re-commission HMS Illustrious & get some of the Harriers back out storage courtesy of the USMC Just a thought? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff_B Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Because Hammond is now the Foriegn Secretary, Fallon is the Defence Minister !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Team Aer Lingus Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 True but hammond was the man responsible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevej60 Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Someone at the MOD is saying Damn! we forgot about a dedicated AEW platform Rings the builders "hack off the ski jump,we need steam cats installed" what no steam! B****cks, what about massive bungies? no what if we invent a big bag of air that can float above the ship with a basket underneath with all the gear in it? already been done eh,ask the RAF to just follow us around with one of those airliner things they have! yea they would probably tell us to B****r off! ah well just bung it all in a helicopter and we,ll just pick on third world countries in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hovis Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 Not much point in fitting catapults at the moment anyway as firstly we have no steam to power them, and secondly the future is EMALS and it hasn't matured enough yet. Maybe when it has proven to work we might convert during a midlife upgrade...? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntPhillips Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 The ships were originally to be designed so that cats could be fitted at some point, I'm not sure if that was subsequently deleted though once the decision to go with the F-35B was taken. If the capability remains howeversteam cats are out as they are gas turbine powered ships so no steam boilers, as hovis rightly points out, there are designs for electro magnetic cats but none have proved powerful or reliable enough as yet. I suspect the F-35 program will eventually come good, and there is realistically very little else available that is politically acceptable except Rafale or Super Hornets and now that QE has been built with a ramp can you honestly see that being reversed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_modeller Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 From Wiki : "In later testimony before a parliamentary committee, Bernard Gray, Chief of Defence Materiel, revealed that even though the carriers had been sold as adaptable and easy to convert for cat and traps, no serious effort had been made in this direction since 2002" Thats why the idea to convert one to CATOBAR was going to be such a horrendously expensive affair (though I read somewhere one of the big US contractors reckoned they could do it for 25% of BAE Systems estimate). EMALS may still be an option some day. For me, its F-35B or Rafale. The Indians are planning to operate STOBAR with Rafale. No way are we going to buy Russian aircraft.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamS Posted September 7, 2014 Share Posted September 7, 2014 How's the agreement going to work with the French? I can understand that the F35 will be able to use their carrier but how will they be able to use ours if there's no CATs? Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_modeller Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Because the Rafale can launch from ski jumps.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff_B Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 From Wiki : "In later testimony before a parliamentary committee, Bernard Gray, Chief of Defence Materiel, revealed that even though the carriers had been sold as adaptable and easy to convert for cat and traps, no serious effort had been made in this direction since 2002" Thats why the idea to convert one to CATOBAR was going to be such a horrendously expensive affair (though I read somewhere one of the big US contractors reckoned they could do it for 25% of BAE Systems estimate). EMALS may still be an option some day. For me, its F-35B or Rafale. The Indians are planning to operate STOBAR with Rafale. No way are we going to buy Russian aircraft.. The ships are a too a size and shape to allow for a CATOBAR conversion, and I think there is machinery space set aside for the extra power generation, but that's about it. Technically it would probably be cheaper to convert after build, as they would have a better idea on the space and power required for EMALS and AARG as they will be bedded in on the USN Ford class carriers. the other aspect is that to modify during build would have dragged out the assembly and build of the 2nd carrier and would have disrupted the contract agreements with the ACA and the subsequent penalties. Should the F-35B fail to live up to expectations, then we could probably get one or both carriers converted over a number of years, the killer during build was the cost was just too high to justify at that point in time. Rafale M is not Ski-jump rated, the Indians are using the Mig-29K and hopefully the Tejas, with possibly the Pak-Fa based next gen replacing them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flankerman Posted September 8, 2014 Share Posted September 8, 2014 Because the Rafale can launch from ski jumps.... When ? Where ???.... has it ever been trialled ?? It isn't a question of simply starting off down the flight deck, slowly increasing speed as you go.......... The Russian carrier Kuznetsov has a ski ramp - but it also has retractable 'fingers' that rise up in front of the Su-33's main landing gear... These hold the aircraft back as it runs up to full power - when they retract, the Su-33 leaps forward. It also has that big, retractable water-cooled blast shield........ It's a lot more complicated than just adding a ski ramp....... Ken PS - and you don't need that much power - the modestly-powered Su-25UTG manages to take off from Kuznetsov quite easily. 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