Originally Posted by
Just This Once...
Are you seriously suggesting that the F-35's role is to provide CAPs for a task force?
Short legs, no AAR, limited AEW and low aircraft numbers make an uncomfortable 24 hour defensive capability for a UK TF. The USN can do it but our capability falls considerably short of the mark.
The UK's vision is for carrier-enabled strike - aka floating airfield. It requires other ships to provide defence for it. Using an F-35 to provide defence against small boats is equally questionable.
I am suggesting the role of carrierborne F-35Bs will depend on the situation, the threat level, what other joint and coalition assets are available, what other priorities exist, and so on. Are you saying no carrierborne F-35B will fly a air defence sortie? Ever? Really? For once we have a truly multirole aircraft. I think the role of the F-35B and other aircraft may well vary from day to day.
Short legs? Compared to what - certainly it has longer legs than previous RN aircraft. Surely the point about air defence is the enemy aircraft come to you? No AAR? Although the new unmanned thing might be different, traditionally carrier aircraft have been refueled by land based tankers, with carrier based aircraft providing fuel for aircraft that miss the wire and need to go around again. Limited AEW? The most important thing is to detect low fliers, which a radar x thousand above sea level can do, we will also have RAF AWACS support in most cases. Low aircraft numbers? Everything I have seen has suggested a figure of 24 jets as routine, and a maximum number of 36, in addition to a full complement of Merlins. Someone else can do the arithmetic.
Naval/maritime task groups need air defence - by aircraft, otherwise the attacker has the advantage of being able to fire anti ship missiles at range, being able to stay just outside of missile range and cause problems, or threatening helicopter operations. There is such a thing as defence in depth.
Last time I looked the term was Carrier Enabled Power Projection and that includes more than just flying strike missions, it includes other task group activities such as amphibious operations, long range Anti Submarine Warfare, and others. It might even include protecting seaborne logistics for Army or RAF operations.
Who mentioned using the F-35B against small boats?
Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry
That's the problem - once they are out there do you expect the SO in charge of the Carrier Group to sacrifice CAP cover, however limited, over strike? It's a multi Bn quid ship, named after the Head of State and Flagship of the Navy..... They will totally prioritise its defence at the cost of anything & everything else
PS I'm not a fan of the Carriers but even so they cost around £ 7 Bn to build and have 1600 crew on board - that's a lot to risk without ensuring they are kept reasonably out of harms way in normal ops... Think of the Falklands and "Burma Star" Woodward.... and he had TWO platforms
Do you ever think the level of defence will be dictated by the threat level on a given day, what other assets are in theatre, and so on. What if the priority that day is something other than the ground attack sortie rate?
Your comment about Woodward is contemptible. Remind me - did we win that war?
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 2nd Jul 2018 at 07:57.