Saw
this story from
Navy News today. Also
this from the RN site.
Both of these demonstrate how flexible embarked aviation is.
It is approximately eight years since this Government said they would go ahead with CVF. At the time the front line strength if the Navy was reduced by about 10%, with another 20% worth of cuts a couple of years go. In exchange for what exactly?
One of the arguments is that we could do more with less due to information superiority - network centric stuff and all that. ISTAR assets such as 849 with the Sea King ASaCs, and the successor (MASC), will be key. I want to look at this in slightly more detail.
Given that we are unlikely to be able to operate the Advanced Hawkeye, why is it impossible to take the radar from the Hawkeye and place it on/in an Osprey? Surely when in forward flight the Osprey's rotors are not much different from propellors? Me no understand........
If Merlin is used for MASC, am I correct in assuming that it is a little faster than the Sea King, and a few modifications would increase the service ceiling (rotor de-icing, pressurised cabin, stub wing(lets) and hence radar coverage? Would having a AAR probe fitted (as the RAF ones do) be of benefit - allowing them to be kept on station longer?
Comments please.