Jump to content

Just saw this on ARC


Shaun

Recommended Posts

If i may....

The UK seriously needs a new carrier. As for what they put on it - well the insistence on flexible force projection results in something not unlike the USN/USMC's amphibious assault ships.

I can see the future of UKAF being something like the USMC in the future. As the USMC air wing is mostly F/A-18, Harrier and helicopters it seems incomprehensible that the UK would not follow a similar direction. But since we already have Typhoon, why would we need F-18s as a land-based fighter?

A navalised Typhoon or even Rafale would seem to be the answer to the force-projection option, but with our carrier design approaching the amphibious assault ship concept, the STOVL F-35 would appear to be our preferred option.

As for cost overruns... well is that news? and to be frank $112m a pop is not that bad when you are talking only two carriers' worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as I wrote in another topic: go downstairs in the archives, grab the old sea harrier plans and make it 10% bigger, with extensive use of newer materials, and with a new engine/electronic system. It worked well before, and will still work now.

Alex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The F-35:

About as manoeuvrable as a Vietnam era fighter.

Carries about a quarter of the ordnance of a Typhoon/Rafal/F-18 etc

Is stealthy (or is it?)

Is far behind programmed development and unproven.

Is hugely over cost.

Has a nice cockpit (Well, lets be fair, excellent systems for the pilot)

Personally I am praying for it to be cancelled. To be stealthy its weapon load and manoeuvrability are so limited its difficult to understand why it’s being built. If you read ausairpower.net it appears the airframe design is compromised meaning it isn’t as stealthy as a Raptor. It’s also planned that stealth will be only used on day one in a ‘peer to peer’ war. After which, with pylons fitted, it's non stealthyand inferior to a Jaguar as a close support aircraft.

So what else do we fly from the new carrier? FA-18E/F were on budget and on time and Rafal is good but can we afford them? I understand that training for non STOVL carrier pilots is hugely expensive. As they say “to stop and land is far easier than landing and stopping.”

Much as we enthusiasts long for the heydays of the FAA I think we should drop the carriers, get the best out of typhoon and then select a second aircraft such as Grippen NG or FA-18 to give us a truly effective and versatile air defence system.

David (First Post!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we dont need jsf, we're just a little island! there's plenty of 2nd hand stuff we can buy cheap from the US that work, look at the money we wasted on the longbow when we could've bought apaches of the US, building them over here was a waste of money. now we do need a carrier for our overseas obligations ( im not talking afghanistan etc , but more Falklands). Now erm... what do we have that works from a carrier....oh yes harriers! failing that lets go for the rafale but not build them here. for the few that we need there's nothing to be gained by setting upa new factory and doing a short run on rafales, we can just buy them off the shelf :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

look at the money we wasted on the longbow when we could've bought apaches of the US, building them over here was a waste of money.

I beg to differ.....

According to Ed Macy in his book Apache the westland apaches are much better than the american ones, so much so that the yanks are jealous. :)

and they're doing a bloody great job in the 'stan :mg:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I beg to differ.....

According to Ed Macy in his book Apache the westland apaches are much better than the american ones, so much so that the yanks are jealous. :)

and they're doing a bloody great job in the 'stan :mg:

Im glad their doing good service and so they should given they cost us at least £3.1 billion, well over twice as much as a 'rebuilt as new' Ah64 from the US . I rather have had the extra £1.7 B or so spent on giving our guys better protection on the ground and a few more transport choppers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I beg to differ.....

According to Ed Macy in his book Apache the westland apaches are much better than the american ones, so much so that the yanks are jealous.

and they're doing a bloody great job in the 'stan

Yes they are a very good aircraft and are doing a great job, but I've read that they are going to require an extensive upgrade to the latest block standard, as the systems in the British aircraft will not have manufacturer support once the contracted spares package is exhausted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bloomin 'eck Deon, if Westland didn't build the UK Apaches who the heck was going to pay my mortgage? :analintruder:

The UK Apache has been doing a sterling job since its entry into service, and has a better engine and defensive aids suite than the then standard US "D" Model. Its performance in hot and sandy places means that the UK Apache is the only one in the game that can lift the Fire Control radar and a useful fuel and weapons load.

The US Mid life upgrade, to block III standard is necessary to remove from the platform a lot of the components which are basically obsolescent- some of the kit is 20 year old technology- you just can't get the bits anymore as no one makes them- its like trying to maintain a Betamax VCR when its cheaper to nip to town and buy a blueray dvd player for £100. It also allows for a technology insertion of all the latest kit and bring the fleet back to one standard. It is sensible that all Apache users, including us and the Danes look to keep as common a platform (within national requirements) to the US Army platform.

(oops, sorry for thread creep, best I don't mention that the MOD have selected General Dynamics for the FRES contract ahead of BAE...)

Edited by Troffa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(oops, sorry for thread creep, best I don't mention that the MOD have selected General Dynamics for the FRES contract ahead of BAE...)

Yes, but calling a US system is wrong. Will be built in UK safe guarding a lot of jobs. 75% UK content built and tested here, GD say will create 10600 jobs.

Calling this a "US" win in the press is like calling the US Tanker bid by EADS a "European" bid. These things dont help.

Julien

Edited by Julien
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bloomin 'eck Deon, if Westland didn't build the UK Apaches who the heck was going to pay my mortgage? :analintruder:

?

I did hear that with the money they'd have saved buying the D the could've retired all the workers in the new factory with a million quid each and now the profits goes to the Italians! Still, it is nice to have a decent bit of kit now and again :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that scenario was proposed by Lewis Page in his book "Lions, donkeys and dinosaurs"- For the record I'd have taken the £1m if offered...

You shock me! :evil_laugh:

Julien

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...