CVF is go..

[entlim]

No,No .NO!

[Col.]

Sea Harriers, that's what we need.

[Oliver]

Even though i wouldn't mind seeing naval Typhoon's, the Rafale does have a big plus in its favour, in that it can carry pretty much eveything the Typhoon can, is already navalised and (this is the big plus imo) has an AESA radar as standard.

God knows why they didn't put an AESA in Typhoon to begin with.

Oh and if the US politicians think like alot of the yanks over on another forum i doubt we'll see the F-35 ever.

As for Carrier names Ark Royal and Audacity would have been my choices, but then will we ever see them.

[rdxtnt]

As for Carrier names Ark Royal and Audacity would have been my choices, but then will we ever see them.

Seems rather strange that the Army and Navy have been sleighting Eurofighter for having taken up so much of the defence budget and now suddenly there seems to be extra money available to build two brand spanking new carriers. Something to do with the latest bout of sabre-rattling over the Falkland Islands perhaps? It'll be interesting to see if they ever do reach completion........... wouldn't bet on it though.

[jenshb]

Wrong Answer!-look what they did with the Hawk!

it becameT45 Goshawk

As Stephen said - the T-45 is virtually a brand new aircraft. There's more to it than just the sharing of basic structure - there's also the configuration. With the Typhoon, the nose wheel is tucked in between the intake ducts, but that is a single-wheel flimsy thing that wouldn't stand up to carrier operations. Try fitting a gear similar to the Rafale M or the F/A-18 in that place, and you'll see what I mean. The Rafale has already had these problems sorted out and designed in due to anticipation of a carrier variant during it's development. I am sure the Typhoon too can have a dual nose gear with a catapult launch bar in place (as well as the other modifications), but it will come at a price and weight. Will it be cost effective for a handful of airframes? I don't see that it will be - the millions of £s spent on developing, testing and qualification of a navalised Typhoon would be better spent on say providing better equipment for the soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Jens

[Bobs_Buckles]

I'm still holding my breath... I'.........m tuurrnninnngg bluuue..

[roym]

Ther was once a time when all it took to frighten the other side was "Royal Navy"

Stephen

There once was a time when there was a Royal Navy.

Stovl carriers? I can't for the life of me understand why they are not being built as conventional carriers with catapults and arresting gear. You can still fly Stovl aircraft from them but not catapult and hook planes from the opposite.

Building them as 'Harrier Carriers' makes them useless to other types, if as has almost happened the F-35 does not make it over here, or does but only as a CTOL type. It's STOVL future is far from secure. Then you'll have two ships to sell to India for their Sea Harriers. And still no fixed wing AEW? The Navy seems to have a short memory. At least if they were built with cats and wires, you could use BAE built Goshawks for training and Rafales/F-18s as a stopgap until the F-35, or until a Naval Typhoon is developed. And why was this never done in the first place? When it was being developed, didn't they know the Sea Harrier was going to go someday?

And I agree, Ark Royal should be there. Even though I'm not British or a royalist!

[WolvoWill]

Even though i wouldn't mind seeing naval Typhoon's, the Rafale does have a big plus in its favour, in that it can carry pretty much eveything the Typhoon can, is already navalised and (this is the big plus imo) has an AESA radar as standard.

God knows why they didn't put an AESA in Typhoon to begin with.

Oh and if the US politicians think like alot of the yanks over on another forum i doubt we'll see the F-35 ever.

As for Carrier names Ark Royal and Audacity would have been my choices, but then will we ever see them.

Don't think Rafale has AESA yet, rather it has a sort of halfway house, a 'PESA' configuration - this was a more ambitious and advanced design than the Typhoons radar, but technical problems with cooling and power requirements meant its probably less capable than the Typhoons more conservative design.

The French are trying to sort out funding for an AESA variant (RBE2), but with the lack of export success for the Rafale so far they have struggled slightly thus far - some have suggested the French government may cut the number of Rafales they plan to buy in order to spend the money on development of the radar instead, so as to boost export prospects, and then upgrade their own Rafales later.

AESA for Typhoon is already in the pipeline (CAESAR is the name they've got for it, standing for Captor AESA Radar), and is currently fitted to a BAC 1-11 airframe for trials. It is expected that Tranche 3 Typhoons will benefit from it, though theres nothing to stop them fitting it to earlier aircraft as an (expensive) incremental upgrade package should the member states choose not to take up their Tranche 3 options.

Personally I hope JSF is the chosen aircraft - as much as I like the Typhoon, I can just imagine it turning into a real fiasco should attempts be made to navalise it, and ending up being overweight, late, and immensely expensive....