Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

ScottC

Harriers to go in defence review

Recommended Posts

Considering how foreign students -such as myself- came to the UK, paid 5 times more than a Brit for tuition fees and on top of that don't get a penny out of benefits despite paying just as much taxes as the rest now that we work, I think you should show some goddamn respect for the contribution that these "immigrant kids" like me give to your society.

On the contrary, I have no problem at all with people that pay their way (as I said in a later post). Most welcome, and I'm sorry you were penalised on the fees. That is another unfair issue altogether.

That comment was directed at people who don't pay their way, are on the take, and expect the out of control benefits system to give them everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, the Harrier's time is past. It's a Cold War relic with no definable role in current or foreseeable operations that cannot be completed better by a conventional aircraft. That said, phasing it out before its replacement enters service strikes me as a major gamble. I understand part of the cause for the mushrooming cost of the new carriers was MOD's inability to squash the Harrier Mafia resulting in indecision on whether to buy the CTOL or STOVL variant of the F-35, hence driving the need for an aircraft carrier design that could be modified for eithe ski jump or catapult launches. Such compromise was never going to result in efficiently-delivered programmes for either the carrier or the aircraft.

I must admit to being rather worried that the Defence Review will leave us with 2 carriers (or should we call them "through deck cruisers" - catchy title, don't ya fink?) with no offensive or defensive capability and the nuclear subs which we wouldn't use anyway, and yet we won't have the RN or RAF Maritime assets to support and protect these vital capital assets. But fear not chaps and chapesses, we still have the Royal Air Flight and the wonderful Army which soon will be small enough to fit inside Wembley Stadium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bet you the Argies go for the Falklands again within 10 years.

This time they'll keep it cos' we won't be able to do anything about it. Just imagine how 'GREAT' Britain will look then?

All this "Britain will still be able to punch above it's weight" won't wash. We're fast becoming a third rate nation & that sickens me.

That's my rant over with. I'm off to work (while I still have a job).

Mike (ex RAF)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.

While we blame the politicians perhaps we should remember that as tax payers we should perhaps be asking more questions about MOD procurement and the several farces and scandals that have dogged the runaway costs of kit that sometimes never even gets into service. In industry companies that can't manage their purchase of new equipment go out of business and people get fired. Not so in MOD it would seem?

JohnT

If we don't have them - how do we land the aircraft? :wicked:

Graham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pure speculation on the BBC's part I'm sure, But

"The BBC has learned that at least one of the new carriers will be redesigned so that it can deploy normal fighter aircraft that do not need a Harrier-style vertical lift capability.

Dr Fox said that there would be "interoperability" so strike fighter aircraft from allies such as France could land on UK aircraft carriers, and vice versa. "

Interesting?

Mike

This is not really new news. Two days ago Jonathan Mock was commenting (accurately) that the carriers were intended to be able to change during construction to use catapult launched aircraft instead/as well, and that the second (PoW) would likely be fitted with them if the F-35 purchase became marginal.

Now, he's not in possesion of a crystal ball. I read that myself some months ago, and I'm in Australia and not really directly concerned.

(By the by, we escaped the GFC entirely, and the second of our new LHD ships has been laid down this year. No fast jets on order though!)

Shane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That comment was directed at people who don't pay their way, are on the take, and expect the out of control benefits system to give them everything.

Well you can scratch the word "immigrants" from your original post then bud, cos all the people who fit that category whom I've met in my long and varied (past) career in the voluntary sector have all been homegrown! :lol:

My personal take is that the cuts need to be made. That is clear. And if it comes down to the difference between global force projection and having a slightly gay CAS aircraft, then it's got to be carriers not Harriers!

Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(i) Due to the ongoing delays in the F-35C JSF, we will in the interim lease USN F-18Es to operate from PoW from 2020.....

That's the impression I get from the PoW having steam catapult capability - keeps the door open for both F-18E and Rafale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Next Defence review in 2015 - using my crystal ball.....

(i) Due to the ongoing delays in the F-35C JSF, we will in the interim lease USN F-18Es to operate from PoW from 2020.....

(ii) Due to an operational requirement, we will purchase 12 P-8 Posiedon aircraft from America (P-8 has very similar mission systems to Nimrod MRA4)

BTW, cancellation of the F-35B probably screws up RR's chance on the engine!

totally agree Dave

except I'd not have used the word "probably"

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How many ludicrous cost over runs can you think of? There - an open challenge to BM'ers to list all the projects that cost way over budget and were too late in service

I'll start with

Typhoon - ok lets blame the Germans for that one?

Chinook software

Nimrod MR4

Nimrod AWACS

now there must be more ...................................!!

Brimstone

Enhanced Paveway. The standard Paveway worked well but was a little expensive. Enhanced Paveway bolts a GPS capability on, almost trebling the cost of the weapon. The Americans used JDAM instead, which didn't have a laser guided capability and so was very cheap and simple. Why we couldn't have a JDAM optimised for British bombs, I don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
- keeps the door open for both F-18E and Rafale.

Except, how old will both those aircraft be when the carriers come on line? Will Boeing or Dassault even still be producing them then? Or will we have some briliant idea of placing an order requesting them to re-open the production line, the penalty of which will probably mean the RN getting a close on 30 year old airframe for close to (or more!) than the unit cost of an F-35.....??!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How many ludicrous cost over runs can you think of? There - an open challenge to BM'ers to list all the projects that cost way over budget and were too late in service

Blimey, how far back to you want to go? How about the Swift, or the early days of the Hunter, or tank procurement throughout WWII, or finishing HMS Vanguard as a glorified cruise liner, or buying Lightnings and Javelins so piecemeal that no two squadrons had the same version, or the Fleet Air Arm's attitude to jet engines and swept wings post-war, or the L60 powerpack, or ...

A few thoughts - may be more or less reassuring:

Having the world's sixth-largest economy and fourth-largest armed services after the review hardly makes the UK third-rate.

Argentina doesn't want to invade the Falklands, is physically incapable of invading the Falklands, and would be much easier to repel if it did because there's a permanent base down there and (so far as I know) the LPDs haven't been retired. All the other fly-specks around the world that still belong to the UK are in no danger of being invaded by their neighbours either. Though, given that we appear to maintain most of the colonies as places where rich people stiff us through tax avoidance, it might be nice if someone would.

All large-scale procurement is "too expensive to delay". The common recourse to shrinking budgets has always been to slow down procurement and thus increase cost - this is at least as common a cause of cost over-runs as the daftness of contractual structures and the greed of suppliers. The new carriers are really no different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Brimstone

Enhanced Paveway. The standard Paveway worked well but was a little expensive. Enhanced Paveway bolts a GPS capability on, almost trebling the cost of the weapon. The Americans used JDAM instead, which didn't have a laser guided capability and so was very cheap and simple. Why we couldn't have a JDAM optimised for British bombs, I don't know.

And wasn't the problems integrating the 2000Lb PW into the GR4 platform?

I remember back at Bruggen in the late 80's the supply chain started to put prices on equipment in a vain effort of making us aware of how much an item cost. Now on the Tornado GR1's Special Weapon Explosive Release Unit the is a special bolt & not assembly & to remove this nut to allow you to remove the SWERU,you need a special closed ended bolt called an inhibitor.

My Snec at the Weapons Training Cell ordered 2 of these & when they arrived,he noticed the both were different.One was painted red & made by a German aircraft company & the other by BAe & bare metal.

He then noticed the price...the Red (German) one was something like Dm20 (about £6.00 in 89) BUT the BAe one was something like £80.00!! 

He then queried the cost thru the relevent channels & eventually a reply came back telling him to wind his neck in!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've seen a few comments along the lines of Churchill or Nelson would be spinning in his grave… This country is facing a very dark time and it falls on every man, woman and child to work together to get the country through this tough time... I think doing your duty has simply taken on a new meaning and Nelson would expect each man to do his duty even it that is to do what it can yo reduce the crippling deficit.

I don't mean to be a doom-sayer, but how exactly would 'doing your duty' to help with dark times help in this instance if by some turn of events the UK ends up involved in a war in the future that they may well be unprepared for? I believe Churchill and/or Nelson would be doing much more than spinning in their graves if, god forbid, that situation ever arose. The first and foremost priority should be defending your sovereign borders, shortly followed by being in a position to make a substantial effort in assisting other countries and coalitions in doing the same where it makes sound political sense to do so.

The expensive 'toys' are always easy targets when budgetary rationalisation and cost-cuting exercises are brought into effect, but surely a little foresight and a lot of hypothetical reasoning would be more than just a strong recomendation given the possible negative implications these actions seem to be facilitatiing.

My 5c,

Wayne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The last time a certain goverment had a go at the armed service, lets get rid of carrier,s Oh Crap Argentina popped over to the falklands, never mind at least we weill have carriers? but what can we fly of them!!! We will hane NO fixed wing aircraft, getting rid of the versitile Harrier is a farce, and what is going to do the job of the Nimrod?, Sack all the Ar@@@@@@s in goverment. Then we may have enough to correct the problems monetry wise.

flipping usless Ba@@@@@s clowns the lot of them :fool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My personal take is that the cuts need to be made. That is clear. And if it comes down to the difference between global force projection and having a slightly gay CAS aircraft, then it's got to be carriers not Harriers!

Al

The days we needed to be able to mount " global force projection" are I'm afraid long gone, since we no longer have an empire, what we need are strong conventional defences for our country along the lines of Sweden. A strong airforce is the first requirement and the harriers would fit into this very nicely with their unique abillity to operate from unprepared strips. Carriers we can do without, as all the navy would be needed for is to patrol our coasts. Bring home troops from Afganistan and declare a strict "non-intervention" policy in third party wars. Forget Trident or any replacement, total waste of money, if we ever used it we'd already be dead, so what's the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to close this one down now. There have been enough comments now to realise that most of us don't like what's happening. :fraidnot:

My own parting shot is - why do they always cut services instead of looking inward to cut wastage, which if the tax payer's alliance is to be believed amounts to a staggering £56bn a year - substantially more than the defence budget in total!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×