PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - No cats and flaps ...... back to F35B?
View Single Post
Old 26th Mar 2012, 07:08
  #253 (permalink)  
Not_a_boffin
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 530
Received 174 Likes on 93 Posts
The STOVL vs CTOL (what is now called CATOBAR) preferences will include some or all of the following.

1. As noted above, STOVL lets the RAF retain cockpits while primarily living ashore, based on the idea that a two-week embarkation counts as delivering carrier strike capability. It's not evil, it's just the way the RAF percieves Maritime aviation.

2. There are those who suggest that launch/recovery rates will be quicker for STOVL. Launch rate almost certainly will be, but with larger CAGs (which is what QEC and it's CAG were designed to deliver) the recovery serial is more likely to resemble a CTOL recovery. More cabs in the pattern will lead to situations where delays build up.

3. Stand by for the myth about tankers to be trotted out. It is absolutely true that the Harrier did not need an organic tanker - although part of that is that there was no way of delivering one and that any fuel would only have to be jettisoned again to get you to VL recovery limits. The STOVL supporters have always assumed that they won't need Texaco, because they are less susceptible to a foul deck (there's always a spot to drop on). That isn't the case with F35B, where if you're doing a Rolling Vertical Landing, you'll need just as much deck area (or more) than an arrested recovery. Combine that with a larger number of cabs in the pattern and you'll need some form of fuel margin or tanker and with a combat radius about 60% of that of the F35C, that's really hitting your effectiveness.

Much of all this is literally down to people (RN, RAF, MoD CS & industry) confusing CVS/SHAR/GR7 ops with those of F35B and QEC. We're not buying a CVS/SHAR/GR7 replacement, we're buying (as justified by reams of operational analysis and campaign modelling) something else entirely.

The something else will also allow the UK to work with FR to provide a proper carrier capability in the Western hemisphere, which is another reason why the US are being so co-operative, as it allows then to reduce optempo and concentrate on 5th and 7th fleets.

Last edited by Not_a_boffin; 26th Mar 2012 at 10:22.
Not_a_boffin is offline