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

Future Carrier (Including Costs)

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.

Future Carrier (Including Costs)

Old 22nd Oct 2010, 15:32
  #2841 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I merely went by the document I had 'to hand'

Anyhoo, makes 'em even better value than at first thought. About half the cost of Rafale M anyway.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 25th Oct 2010, 09:26
  #2842 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,155
Received 1,461 Likes on 660 Posts
ORAC is offline  
Old 25th Oct 2010, 10:34
  #2843 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: beyond the hedge of reason
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just a thought...

Would it not make sense to buy a flight of cat and trap capable aircraft for training and working up new carrier crews and aviators? Perhaps it would be useful to replace the FRADU Hawks with T45 Goshawks? Or even F18s?

Or am I, as is usually the case, entirely 'Out to Lunch?
E L Whisty is offline  
Old 25th Oct 2010, 10:43
  #2844 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,371
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Would it not make sense to buy .....
with what exactly? We are broke, making savings of 10% ish, and are already getting rid of (arguably) critical capabilities such as MPA. To buy anything means giving up something else ..... what do you suggest ....?

Lets see how quickly, and in which order, the Red Arrows / Typhoon / GR4 / RAFP / RAF Regiment / BBMF / E3D etc appear .....
Wrathmonk is offline  
Old 25th Oct 2010, 10:53
  #2845 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 80
Posts: 16,777
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Quite, sensible to buy cat n trap aircraft.

Sensible to suggest we them is another thing.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 25th Oct 2010, 10:59
  #2846 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Trumpville; On the edge
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
with what exactly?
ISTR that there is an organisation in South Africa that has recently shut up shop - they may have some surplus Buccaneers?
Trumpet_trousers is offline  
Old 25th Oct 2010, 12:10
  #2847 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: crewe
Age: 77
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
TT take your pick
david parry is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2010, 08:28
  #2848 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Due to the numbers of F-35C pilots the MOD seems likely to get, both the RAF & RN will indeed be using T-45 Goshawks for training.

NAS Pensacola will welcome those UK aviators with open arms... every year.




BTB... the final T-45 (the 221st, a T-45C) was delivered to the USN on 29 November 2009... so the production line has been closed for almost a year.

Last edited by GreenKnight121; 26th Oct 2010 at 08:42.
GreenKnight121 is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2010, 22:29
  #2849 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Torres Strait
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Commanding Carrier Aviation

Principle Authors: Mike Clapp, Steven Jermy, ‘Sharkey’ Ward, Sir Mike Layard and Sir John Woodward

COMMANDING CARRIER AVIATION The Phoenix Think Tank
oldnotbold is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2010, 11:24
  #2850 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Oh my word - this article only goes to show how out of touch some of the 'old and bold' really are. I'm very surprised that Steve Jermy put his name to this piece of work (and I use that phrase loosely) since he was incredibly supportive and complimentary re JFH during his tenure in the JAMO...the fact that Sharkey Ward's name is also attached and that it was he who posted the article is not a surprise at all. Just to feed the debate, here's some of the more interesting comments from this article, which I'm sure will generate interesting discussion...

the failed Joint Force Harrier experiment
I'm sure the current crop of JFH pilots would have something to say about this throw away comment, including Sharkey's own son! I guess the team that constructed this article forgot to notice that JFH did phenomenally well in Op ALLIED FORCE, Op TELIC and Op HERRICK - all told, the force has been involved, more often than not, with high tempo, kinetic, dynamic air ops since 1999, and IMHO, performed exceptionally well. If that's what we can achieve with a 'failed experiment' just think what we'll achieve with JSF.

Britain’s Invincible-class carrier force is in the weakest state of its thirty year life and, for example, would be unable to mount an operation to re-take the Falklands Islands.
Firstly, why would we need to retake the FIs - there is absolutely no need to, and the last time I looked we already have a sizable force based there to 'deter' a would-be aggressor. Secondly, at present day, JFH's ability to project relevant, precise and timely air effect from the carrier far far far outweighs what the RN has been able to achieve in the past, even during the Falklands War (this is just a point, I am not denigrating what was achieved during the FI war, because it was undeniably an amazing achievement by both FAA and RAF embarked Harrier pilots).

The Fleet Air Arm (FAA) officer structures require 30% less aircrew and 40% less senior officers than RAF equivalents
This is a pretty broad-brush statement, especially since the FAA rely upon the RAF structure to get their pilots to the front line. I'd like to see the current stats regards FAA FW pilots v support pers (eg how many CSG pers are there v front line pilots?). More importantly, if the FAA were told to 'go it alone' without the help of the RAF structure, I wonder what the stats would look like then?

The FAA has over a 100 years’ of corporate carrier experience, and represent this country’s only carrier professionals
I'm afraid that this is no longer the case, and the sooner the RN realise this and face the fact that the RAF now also has a LOT of embarked experience to offer, the sooner our attempts at jointery will have more success. It may be a hard nettle to grasp, but it is essential that the RN start to acknowledge this fact - in not too many years, the RAF's recruitment poster will have an aircraft carrier on it!

all other carrier navies in the world have their own naval air forces, whose officers also go on to command ships
How many FAA Harrier pilots have gone to command an RN carrier - not many (I think I can think of one). Does the RN suppose that the Queen Elizabeth class carriers will be commanded by ex-JSF pilots? If this is the case, will an RAF JSF pilot who has spent his/her life projecting 5th gen airpower from the sea be eligible to command the carrier vice have a station command tour? (jointery at its best perhaps!)

I could go one - and all the above from only the Executive Summary!

Ready and waiting for the spears...
WhyNavy is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2010, 11:39
  #2851 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Torres Strait
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Defence cuts: David Cameron attacked by Royal Navy Harrier pilot
David Cameron, the Prime Minister, has been publicly rebuked over the cuts to the defence budget by a Royal Navy Harrier pilot who said he was now facing unemployment.

Defence cuts: David Cameron attacked by Royal Navy Harrier pilot - Telegraph
oldnotbold is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2010, 11:41
  #2852 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Torres Strait
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Harrier v Tornado
BRITAIN’S FAST JET FORCES – NATIONAL INTEREST VERSUS VESTED INTEREST.
http://thephoenixthinktan...-versus-vested-interest/
oldnotbold is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2010, 12:10
  #2853 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: crewe
Age: 77
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why Navy.... But plenty of FAA pilots were Captains of Aircraft Carriers, when we had a Navy
david parry is offline  
Old 27th Oct 2010, 12:32
  #2854 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: where-ever nav's chooses....
Posts: 833
Received 46 Likes on 26 Posts
I wouldn't get too excited about CSG as

a - it's just been scrapped
b - it was tiny. No more than 10 Officers at most, which may have coincided with the number of Harrier pilots we had!
alfred_the_great is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2010, 07:57
  #2855 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 17,155
Received 1,461 Likes on 660 Posts
Suggestion of FAA posts on French Rafale M sqns, plus using Atlantiques to plug the Nimrod hole......

FT: RAF fast jets could fly from French carrier
ORAC is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2010, 12:33
  #2856 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As I am sure has been said elsewhere, the aircraft and pilots just represent the front end of the carrier strike capability. The idiocy of the SDSR decision, which the PM is about to compound in the FR/UK Defence deal (FT Today), is that we risk losing the capability to operate jets off carriers. All of the expertise on the current CVSs will have gone (we are getting rid of the CVSs), the aircrew will have gone (either PVRd, redundant or moved to other aircraft types, the command experience will have gone (as will the met, ATC, FC, deck handlers, planners etc, etc).

In my many years in the Service and beyond it has been the most astonishing Defence decision made - I just hope the CAS (I understand the current CAS made a promise to the PM) at the time can deliver because the RN will have lost the ability. I presume the RAF will provide all of the manpower, including ship's company?
Bismark is offline  
Old 28th Oct 2010, 12:55
  #2857 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've just had a scan through Mr Wards article and despite the anti-RAF undertones generaly he and his oppos make sense. If the UK does get these carriers (still a big IF in my opinion) then it should be the FAA that run the show.

Having worked in the MoD for 8 years with all three services I have never met anyone in the RAF that was willing to go to sea. I have also met a few that had done seatime and all had said if it were a permenent feature of their careers they would leave. One was working his notice because he hated it!

There is no doubt that the RAF could run ALL of the UK's air assets but I reckon they'd end up with so much personel churn that they'd have to admit defeat in the end. As is mooted in the article turning crews around mid deployment would not be either operationaly or cost efficient and I dare say it would not do the morale of the ships company any good either!
althenick is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2010, 16:40
  #2858 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Gordon Brown set to deliver Commons speech

Gordon Brown will signal his return to the political fray tomorrow by making his first Commons speech since leaving Downing Street.


The former Prime Minister will insist maintenance on Britain's two new aircraft carriers should be carried out at a Scottish shipyard near his constituency, rather than in France.
He's obviously got his finger on the pulse!
LFFC is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2010, 16:57
  #2859 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
He is talking about the maintenance contracts....Not yet signed but possibly going to go to Thales and if we are not careful we will see our Carriers being refitted in Toulon....Oh the absolute shame....At least they serve wine at lunch..!!!!
vecvechookattack is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2010, 17:02
  #2860 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But I understood that we'll only need a maintenance contract for one of them!
LFFC 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.