PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - No cats and flaps ...... back to F35B?
View Single Post
Old 14th May 2012, 11:16
  #834 (permalink)  
glojo
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We all know that if we want the F-35B to act as an EXTREMELY expensive tanker, we have to pay the bill for all the research, development, conversion etc. Has anyone considered how much this would cost and would it even be viable?

The carrier is there to operate where our light blue brothers cannot reach which rules out using their excellent tanking capability so what is this man talking about?

Originally Posted by Chief of the Defence Staff General Sir David Richards
Whilst it is true that the Carrier Variant offered greater range, this is not a crucial advantage – given our major investment in air-to-air refuelling – when weighed against the greater time to bring it into service, and the increasing cost. The balance has tipped back in favour of STOVL, which has distinct advantages of its own, such as versatility and agility.
I accept the Royal Navy has Admirals that have Fleet Air Arm experience, but is that STOVL or conventional carrier experience and to me there will always be a World of difference and where do they stand regarding this decision?

Witter time (Too much pain with too much time on my hands)
My thoughts are the Royal Navy has gone far beyond 'over-stretch' and it is now performing a 'fire brigade' service of attempting to get the right ship to the right location at the right time and that is simply not good enough. We allegedly do not have a Royal Navy warship taking part in anti-piracy patrols off the coast of Somalia? No warship deployed as West Indies guard-ship and the list goes on and on, so can we afford the two carriers and do we have the sailors to man both vessels?

I lean toward all fast jet aircraft being capable of operating from carriers with two year squadron attachments to the warship as part of the duties of these pilots and the maintenance staff required to look after them. Close down a number of RAF airfields to help fund this concept and then ensure we always have one carrier deployed wherever it is most needed. If pilots don't like the thought of going to sea, then fine, don't volunteer for fast jet flying.

If all aircraft are capable of carrier operations then those deployed on Herrick would be deployed from the shore based squadrons leaving the carrier borne aircraft to carry out their sea borne role. One service with the responsibility of fast jet operation and clearly they would need to work hand in glove with their multi engined counter parts with none of the silly inter service bickering.
glojo is offline