Future Carrier (Including Costs)

[FB11]

Capt P U G Wash,

Interesting slant on the US non-reciprocal exchanges that might suggest the Navy is hiding pilots in the FA-18 system so that might take on CV jet flying from aircraft carriers.

The reality is much more simple as disappointing as this is to the conspiracy theorists. The demise of Harrier means that RN pilots have no alternative aircraft to maintain and develop it's pilots over the next 10 years.

The RAF, when asked for fast jet slots to allow for this 'joint' force to be ready when the time came said 'no'. The RN, faced with no other option, brokers a deal with the USN (after all, navies deal with navies) and do note that this was before the variant change decision in October last year.

The cost to UK taxpayers for 3.5 years flying a very capable jet (banking upwards of 1000 hours and 300 traps in a Super Hornet) is less than the full flying hour cost of 25 Typhoon flying hours. I would call that a good deal.

Now that we are in the CV camp, it is a free and happy position for the UK that some of the pilots will be well placed to test, evaluate and operate the F-35C Carrier Variant compared to those who come from the 'multi-role' world flying 8-12 land based hours per month.

So nothing more sinister than no fast jet seats in the UK for RN pilots to fly so they went to their much bigger friend in the US and smaller friend in France who have stepped up to the plate. By doing so they have helped the RN (and the UK) to be more likely to deliver a 5th gen capability in the challenging and demanding maritime environment.

This is also why the RAF tried to progress a French Navy Rafael exchange which didn't get past first base when I had visibility of it. Articles in JDW by air ranking officers would have probably put paid to any agreed slot anyway.

More dangerous to the UK is those who think that it would be clever to push the F-35A at every opportunity as an alternative; much more likely to be a re-run of the late 60's when both the RAF and the RN lost out because of inter-service childishness.

DPOC is dead so the original reason for pushing F-35B as a non-competitor to it is no longer an issue.

We're therefore not buying F-35C because the UK needs a 5th gen capability in isolation. We're buying a replacement aircraft for FA2 and GR9 that can fly from an aircraft carrier and has 5th gen characteristics. Maybe if we could all agree that one needs the other the better else we all lose.

We have an agreed policy out of SDSR that gives the UK a fantastic aircraft and a capability from the joint QE platforms that will give us a flexible response for 50 years.

The special relationship would not be in jeopardy if future F-35 decisions that had an impact on a UK buy were because of the US financial climate.

And as for us playing second fiddle to all the other nations who remain in the programme - if the unit price cost goes up so far that the US starts to drop out, how many of the minor nations will still be in at the end?

Maybe a pragmatic UK would again be prepared for viable alternatives that keeps current policy on track without us losing the lot because we try and peddle a first day of the war mantra that we haven't achieved for the last 50 years.