Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Royal Navy to Buy F18F

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Royal Navy to Buy F18F

Old 21st Aug 2010, 07:13
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
It seems the RN (FAA) are already pushing guys to the F18 on exchange. Even the new guys coming out of Valley are getting slots across there (USN). I wonder if they already know something????
Could be the last? is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2010, 07:48
  #202 (permalink)  

Evertonian
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: #3117# Ppruner of the Year Nominee 2005
Posts: 12,428
Received 88 Likes on 49 Posts
I feel like its time for a gratuitous piccy of our new ones... It's no Pig, but I still sleep well at night!

Buster Hyman is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2010, 07:50
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Surrey Hills
Posts: 1,478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If they wait just a little bit longer won't there be lots of earlier F-18s going cheap? Think of the money saved. After all if it is a need to put wings on a new carrier and then parade off some snitty Third World country whose inhabitants won't know the difference between an early [very cheap] and late [much more expensive] model F-18. Let's face it with the reduction in hours flown, why buy anything flyable at brand new prices! They will never reach anywhere near their time-expired/weary wings date.
In fact seeing as the Royal Navy has been told not to upset those naughty pirates why not build some Pinewood Studios replica battleships [all phoney but looking authentic] at a fraction of the normal cost and save even more money?

I just do not understand why we shell out billions in aid to third world countries and decimate our own armed forces [ who are essential for our well being].
aviate1138 is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2010, 09:15
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southampton
Age: 54
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
aviate1138:

If they wait just a little bit longer won't there be lots of earlier F-18s going cheap? Think of the money saved. After all if it is a need to put wings on a new carrier and then parade off some snitty Third World country whose inhabitants won't know the difference between an early [very cheap] and late [much more expensive] model F-18. Let's face it with the reduction in hours flown, why buy anything flyable at brand new prices! They will never reach anywhere near their time-expired/weary wings date.

The USN/USMC F/A-18 As/Bs and Cs/Ds won't be of any use to anyone, they may not have reached the end of their airframe hours but they have used up their allotment of cat/trap cycles and cannot be flown from the deck anymore. Useful for spare parts mainly but not much else.

In fact seeing as the Royal Navy has been told not to upset those naughty pirates why not build some Pinewood Studios replica battleships [all phoney but looking authentic] at a fraction of the normal cost and save even more money?

In the same vein, why doesn't the RAF just make do with lots of wooden/plastic Typhoon mockups on their airfields? That way they can make do with just the real Tiffies they have now and save a fortune on operating costs. Alternatively since the Russians only seem to send relics from the fifties to probe our airspace, how about we reply by intercepting them with Hawker Hunters? They might take the hint... I hear we have some back in service at the moment anyway, why not task them with northern QRA? And the army can buy lots of inflatable tanks like they did in WW2. Fooled the nazis in '44...
Obi Wan Russell is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2010, 17:09
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is no way in this or any other world that the Royal Navy is going to go to the hassle & expense of using F-18's, new or old, or Rafales for that matter; the only reason the CVF's are being made 'easy' to fit cat n' trap' is so that they are easy to sell off, once the labour governments' committment to provide jobs has worn off.

I am not pro-labour by any means, but I do do think of history in my short span; wasn't it a certain M.Thatcher who all but sold 'Invincible' a fraction before the Falklands War ?

If you thought Bliar & co. were bad, wait 'till you see the Tories in action; savaged any good project 1960's onwards, ( I don't think the TSR2 was a great idea in hindsight, and just take a look at the thing without rose tinted glasses ).

It would be amazing if the CVF and F-35 both get through cuts, but the F-35B and British Fleet protection / power projection is useless without the carrier.

If we have to go ( relatively ) cheap, let's keep the carriers as they are multi-purpose, and, yes I've said it before, for Christ's Sake get some AMRAAM equipped Harrier 2+ !!!
Double Zero is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2010, 18:52
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Royal Berkshire
Posts: 1,722
Received 74 Likes on 37 Posts
Originally Posted by Double Zero
If you thought Bliar & co. were bad, wait 'till you see the Tories in action; savaged many good project 1960's onwards, ( I don't think the TSR2 was a great idea in hindsight, and just take a look at the thing without rose tinted glasses ).
TSR.2 was cancelled by a Labour Govt. as was the P.1154 'supersonic Harrier'
GeeRam is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2010, 22:22
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Only after being stuffed by Conservative and American moves; even the fairly far left Tony Benn ( thought little of him until moderately recent interviews, now have a high opinion, this chap needs a serious listening to ) fought for the British Defence Industry & for that matter Concorde;

Rather different from Thatchers' attitude, 'you Mark have this bit, X, have the train system, etc...

And I don't vote Labour !

DZ
Double Zero is offline  
Old 21st Aug 2010, 23:17
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is no way in this or any other world that the Royal Navy is going to go to the hassle & expense of using F-18's
And that stunning statement way well, however inadvertently, detail the eventual reason for the demise of RN fixed wing aviation, because if you think F18's are too expensive.....

Anyway, Hook Down, Wheels Down, proper Naval Aviation...YouTube - Hook Down, Wheels Down - The Story Of The United States Navy's Aircraft Carriers (ca 1970's)
glad rag is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2010, 14:05
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Bavaria
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So from the UK plc point of view the British tank is probably actually "cheaper", and far better for the country as a whole.
10/10 for arthimetic. 0/10 for missing the point that the army ends of with a lousy tank. (something about knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing?)
Jetex_Jim is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2010, 15:22
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Roman Empire
Posts: 2,437
Received 61 Likes on 28 Posts
0/10 for not reading the question properly, especially where it said......"the actual performance of each tank is broadly similar".

Or for not reading that it was a hypothetical situation where I deliberately removed performance of the item (tank) as an issue in order to discuss the purely financial aspects!


Or are you just saying that all British kit is crap........?
Biggus is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2010, 16:51
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Bavaria
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Or are you just saying that all British kit is crap........?
No, but I agree, this bit makes your proposition totally hypothetical:
......"the actual performance of each tank is broadly similar".
Jetex_Jim is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2010, 16:54
  #212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London UK
Posts: 527
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
For every German tank we buy, £6M goes out of the UK economy to Germany and, unless the Germans use some British parts in their tanks, that is the last we ever see of it.
So where do you think they will spend £6M sterling?
Dr Jekyll is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2010, 17:17
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Roman Empire
Posts: 2,437
Received 61 Likes on 28 Posts
Loan/give it to Greece......
Biggus is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2010, 17:29
  #214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Oop North
Age: 57
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We are discussing on this thread buying the F18 E\F as a strike aircraft. Surely we need to be also thinking about some sort of air defence aircraft? Something along the lines of the Sea Gripen, which appears to have a developed version of the same engines as the F18.
Extg3 is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2010, 17:48
  #215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London UK
Posts: 527
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Who will spend it back with us.
Dr Jekyll is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2010, 22:56
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,779
Received 75 Likes on 34 Posts
We are discussing on this thread buying the F18 E\F as a strike aircraft. Surely we need to be also thinking about some sort of air defence aircraft?
The US Navy consider the F18 E/F to be good enough as an air defence aircraft. It should probably therefore be good enough for us as well, in this post-"gold plating" era.

Having just 1 multi-role type embarked gives massively increased flexibility, allowing the proportion of aircraft assigned to DCA / OCA / CAS / AI etc to be varied according to the situation and not the availability of assets. This was one of the reasons why they tried strapping bombs to F14s and eventually retired them. We are also trying to reduce the number of different types we operate to economise on logistic support.
Easy Street is offline  
Old 23rd Aug 2010, 07:10
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Oop North
Age: 57
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I hadn't realised the F18 was used in the air defence role. In that case makes sense to buy the one type.
Extg3 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2010, 03:49
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The USN uses the single-seat F/A-18E as its replacement for the F-14 tomcat as "fleet defense fighter" and the two-seat F/A-18F as its replacement for the A-6E Intruder as "all-weather medium attack" aircraft.

However, both aircraft are nearly as proficient in each other's roles as in their prime role, so either one is often found performing either role.
GreenKnight121 is offline  
Old 24th Aug 2010, 14:21
  #219 (permalink)  

Evertonian
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: #3117# Ppruner of the Year Nominee 2005
Posts: 12,428
Received 88 Likes on 49 Posts
How much were you guys quoted again???

Stealth fighters cheap at $140m

  • Ian McPhedran
  • From: Herald Sun
  • August 25, 2010 12:00AM


The F35 Joint Strike Fighters are fifth-generation jets. Source: Supplied



AUSTRALIA will pay a "fly away" price of less than $60 million each for up to 100 of the world's most advanced stealth fighter jets.

But the total will be more than double that for a package that includes weapons, sensors, training and lifetime support for the F35 Joint Strike Fighter.
At $140 million, the single-seat jets will be cheaper than the 24 two-seat Super Hornets bought by the Howard government for $6.6 billion or more than $220 million each.
The multi-role jet is powered by the biggest fighter engine ever built, which propels it at almost twice the speed of sound and it is virtually invisible to radar.
In addition to stealth, the aircraft is completely fly-by-wire with electric controls, fully networked with pilot voice recognition and a helmet mounted display offering "see through" features that enable the pilot to even look down through the jet.
Australia is buying up to 100 jets from the US Air Force under a so-called foreign military sales deal.
For the first time the aircraft maker, Lockheed Martin, has provided a "firm" price to Australian taxpayers in 2010 dollars.
During a briefing at Lockheed Martin's huge state-of-the-art JSF factory at Fort Worth in Texas, project chief Tom Burbage revealed that Australia, as one of nine global partners, would pay less for its planes than Israel, which has ordered 20 of the fifth-generation fighters.
"Your average cost of buying your fleet of aeroplanes will be at that number ($60m) or maybe slightly below it," Mr Burbage said.
Israel last week said it was buying 20 JSFs for a total outlay of $2.75 billion or about $140 million each based on an initial fly-away cost of $92 million, the same figure as early Australian aircraft.
Mr Burbage also revealed that the hourly flying cost of the JSF would be about 20 per cent below the RAAF's fleet of F/A-18 Hornet fighters.
"That has been fairly stable for the past two or three years," he said.
The first two RAAF jets will be delivered in 2014 when pilots will train on them at Eglin air force base in Florida.
The initial operational squadron of 14 planes is due in service by 2018.
Mr Burbage said the biggest challenge for the program was managing the global supply chain for aircraft components.
Up to 70 per cent of costs come from the supply chain that includes manufacturing centres in many countries, including $120 million for 180 projects in Australia so far.
Buster Hyman is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2010, 20:34
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Torres Strait
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So, if this turns out to be true. Australia will pay 'only' $140 million each for the F35. ..

Correct me if I am wrong but, unlike Australia, the UK is looking at the -more complex and expensive- F35B STOVL version, so this Australian costing -if accurate- does not mean very much at all in terms of the proposed UK buy of a different, more complex and more expensive aircraft.

For Carrier operation the Super Hornet or, if it is affordable, even the F35C looks a much better bet for UK. For one thing Cat and Trap could give you Hawkeye AEW.

EMALS is now going very well. CVF is designed to take it. Fit it. Buy Super Hornet and a few Hawkeye. Seems to be the way the RN's minds are running since so many FAA pilots are training with USN on Hornets.

What is better for most purposes maybe 8 F35B and Helo AEW or 24 Super Hornet and Hawkeye AEW?

Last edited by oldnotbold; 25th Aug 2010 at 22:32.
oldnotbold is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.