Harrier Dawn
I think the debate on whether we will get 48 or 130+ F35 is rather academic given yesterday's announcement that future government spending will fall to levels comparable with the 1930s. Health, Pensions and Overseas development ring-fenced - hmmm, let me see, where will the cuts come from.
future government spending will fall to levels comparable with the 1930s
Written with my tongue firmly in my cheek as I'm fully aware we had neither an NHS or much of a welfare system to speak of then!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,868
Received 2,821 Likes
on
1,202 Posts
What I cannot get my head round is why do we need VTOL in the first place? I totally get it for a land based operations where you would be operating off unprepared strips in dispersed locations.
But surely the role of the Naval fighter is to protect the fleet and any landings that may take place, they would operate from a Carrier safely away from the beach head out of harms way and not normally deploy ashore.
Now the Sea Harrier I got, the ships they deployed from were not large enough to support conventional fixed wing aircraft, so the ability to VTOL was a requirement, but with these new Carriers they are sufficently large enough to carry conventional aircraft, to constrain them to simply carrying a VTOL type just seems to me as a retrograde step, as the ability to hover is really redundant with the capability the increased ships size brings.
But surely the role of the Naval fighter is to protect the fleet and any landings that may take place, they would operate from a Carrier safely away from the beach head out of harms way and not normally deploy ashore.
Now the Sea Harrier I got, the ships they deployed from were not large enough to support conventional fixed wing aircraft, so the ability to VTOL was a requirement, but with these new Carriers they are sufficently large enough to carry conventional aircraft, to constrain them to simply carrying a VTOL type just seems to me as a retrograde step, as the ability to hover is really redundant with the capability the increased ships size brings.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Sunny Side
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said NutLoose.
We are buying the right boats, but have then chosen to go the STOVL route. Means we end up with the wrong fighter/strike aircraft and constrain for ever the type of aircraft that can operate from our boats.
To cap it all, we will end up buying only a handful of F35.
Bonkers!
S-D
We are buying the right boats, but have then chosen to go the STOVL route. Means we end up with the wrong fighter/strike aircraft and constrain for ever the type of aircraft that can operate from our boats.
To cap it all, we will end up buying only a handful of F35.
Bonkers!
S-D
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Sunny Side
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some background as to why the Marines are looking at the QEs...
Marines Shift F-35 Deployment Plans | Ares
Marines Shift F-35 Deployment Plans | Ares
We're not spendings squillions on those boats to carry the USMC. Any link up with the USMC will be a convenient way to get some jets on those boats and stop the RN being a laughing stock. It might even stop their shiny new toys being mothballed.
S-D
S-D - The F-35B is all about coalition ops - US commanders are very clear about this. I can see that the USMC will be very interested in two carriers that can sustain 30+ F-35Bs but only carry a dozen or so (at least until 2023-24) because the UK has only 48 jets in total. That's because the LHA/LHDs, as big as they are, have much less capacity for jets because of all the other stuff on board.
Remember, too, that the US has a vast element of control over partner F-35s, at all times.
Remember, too, that the US has a vast element of control over partner F-35s, at all times.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Sunny Side
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pretty much as I said then LO:
S-D
Any link up with the USMC will be a convenient way to get some jets on those boats and stop the RN being a laughing stock. It might even stop their shiny new toys being mothballed.
Some background as to why the Marines are looking at the QEs...
Marines Shift F-35 Deployment Plans | Ares
Marines Shift F-35 Deployment Plans | Ares
Seems the "new" CONOP is to fly the B's off the LHA/LHD to a forward operating base and shift every couple of days to keep the enemy guessing. This allows the LHA/LHD to stay further away out of harms way.
The USMC Harrier was always touted that they would be able to operate from farp's with just a bit of gas, weapons and a few wrenches (much like the early RAF concept). Always a big selling point, but in reality used infrequently in actual USMC operations. Outside of exercies, USMC Harriers usually operated ashore at well established bases with plenty of support.
Seems like this seems more like a re-branding, than a radical new FARP. With the LHA/LHD further away, and the need to move every 24-48 hours, this could be ploy to garner support for more MV-22's and King Stallions- the logistics of moving a major M-FARP every day would be massive.
