PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - No cats and flaps ...... back to F35B?
View Single Post
Old 19th Mar 2012, 12:24
  #113 (permalink)  
Not_a_boffin
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 527
Received 170 Likes on 91 Posts
The Russians have been operating a STOVL carrier for several years although they opted for a more conventional type aircraft, plus arrestor wires.

No they haven't. The Russ have never operated a STOVL carrier. Kiev and her ilk were VTOL using Forgers. Kuznetsov has been STOBAR from the off with Flanker and Frogfoot variants.

Are they wrong when they made the decision to take that ship out of service and convert it to a conventional carrier with catapults?

Don't believe that's what they're doing, but happy to be corrected.

Where do we go if the 'B' does not come on line?

Home, for good. There are no STOVL alternatives.

Was money involved when we ordered our EMALS system?

That's ususally the case when paying for military equipment. However, I'm not sure that the system has been ordered yet. Fox seemed to think he had managed to get a shipset secured for PoW last summer.

Was money involved when we decided to exchange one of the early 'B' model aircraft for the 'C'?

Pass.

How much money has already been spent in the research and development of the carriers to convert them to CATOBAR configuration?

Since the official change to the C variant, I'd suspect a couple of million at most, certainly no more than £10M at the very extreme.

I was told they were never going to be built with that ski jump we saw on the through deck cruisers and yet from all accounts these aircraft are going to struggle taking off with anything like a decent payload. Will that decision also be reviewed and another redesign considered?

You were told wrong. All QEC designs until the official change to 'C' have had a large prominent ski-ramp at the bow. That remains the case for the STOVL option ship.

If we go for the 'B' then does that means the carrier will not be able to operate any type of EW or AEW fixed wing asset? Would we be able to develop a UAV to carry out these roles?

Pretty much. No.

We deserve better.

Yes we do. Through a combination of ineptitude in MoD and elsewhere, deliberate obstruction inside and outside of MB, poor decision-making in the Naval staff and abject political will have combined to make what should have been a relatively straightforward design and procurement process into the current horror show.
Not_a_boffin is offline