Future Carrier (Including Costs)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dirty Des to HCDC on JSF tech-transfer:
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi...&modele=jdc_34
I can translate some of this for you:
MP: Do we have a 'plan B' if the US refuses to give us tech transfer?
Des: Err, no.
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi...&modele=jdc_34
I can translate some of this for you:
MP: Do we have a 'plan B' if the US refuses to give us tech transfer?
Des: Err, no.
both
NavalEye I stand corrected - I had thought the Italians were using a SK variant.
WEBF - the compound variant can be seen on Beedalls pages, as can the Italian AEW version. No idea how well it performs though.
http://navy-matters.beedall.com/masc.htm
Incidentally, as both the Spanish & Italians fly the Harrier II+, they are now far more capable than the poor old FAA in terms of air to air. The spanish even have their area AD ship in service although it appears to have been hit very hard with the ugly stick as it went down the berth.....
WEBF - the compound variant can be seen on Beedalls pages, as can the Italian AEW version. No idea how well it performs though.
http://navy-matters.beedall.com/masc.htm
Incidentally, as both the Spanish & Italians fly the Harrier II+, they are now far more capable than the poor old FAA in terms of air to air. The spanish even have their area AD ship in service although it appears to have been hit very hard with the ugly stick as it went down the berth.....
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Royal Air Force Strategy 2006" published today.
This document provides the new RAF chief’s vision for the Royal Air Force out to 2025, and explains the key themes that should underpin its development over the coming years.
“It is our collective job to bring definition to this part of our vision, using our professional knowledge and imagination to identify and shape the capabilities that will be required to 2025 and beyond,” says Air Chief Marshal Sir Glenn Torpy, Chief of the Air Staff.
Words entirely missing from the 32 page document include: aircraft carrier, navy, CVF
This document provides the new RAF chief’s vision for the Royal Air Force out to 2025, and explains the key themes that should underpin its development over the coming years.
“It is our collective job to bring definition to this part of our vision, using our professional knowledge and imagination to identify and shape the capabilities that will be required to 2025 and beyond,” says Air Chief Marshal Sir Glenn Torpy, Chief of the Air Staff.
Words entirely missing from the 32 page document include: aircraft carrier, navy, CVF
RonO
The clue to why those words are missing in Sir Glenns vision are in his job title - Chief of the AIR Staff. In the same way I wouldn't expect the Chief of the NAVAL staff or the Chief of the GENERAL Staff to give many words over to Typhoon or MFTS etc.
Now if it had been the Chief of the DEFENCE Staff (BTW also a 4* Royal Air Force Officer) who had put forward his strategy without mentioning aircraft carrier, naval or CVF then I would be worried if I was Dark Blue!
The clue to why those words are missing in Sir Glenns vision are in his job title - Chief of the AIR Staff. In the same way I wouldn't expect the Chief of the NAVAL staff or the Chief of the GENERAL Staff to give many words over to Typhoon or MFTS etc.
Now if it had been the Chief of the DEFENCE Staff (BTW also a 4* Royal Air Force Officer) who had put forward his strategy without mentioning aircraft carrier, naval or CVF then I would be worried if I was Dark Blue!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Monk,
Why wouldn't CGS or CNS use the words in MFTS as the RN and Army are equal partners with the RAF in this JOINT capability. Of course CAS should have mentioned JOINT Force Harrier and Carrier Strike from the Sea as it will form one of the pillars of deploying the somewhat limited future manned strike capability - the rest will be done with TLAM etc and eventually UCAVs.
Why wouldn't CGS or CNS use the words in MFTS as the RN and Army are equal partners with the RAF in this JOINT capability. Of course CAS should have mentioned JOINT Force Harrier and Carrier Strike from the Sea as it will form one of the pillars of deploying the somewhat limited future manned strike capability - the rest will be done with TLAM etc and eventually UCAVs.
Fair cop - MFTS was a poor example. The point I was trying to make is a single service chief is more likely to talk of his own "empire" in his own single-service strategy. CAS is no different to CNS/CGS in this respect. Whilst many may wish it otherwise we are still three seperate services who have individual service interests and single service chiefs to develop those interests and take them forward. An aircraft carrier is not joint (although the air wing aspect of it is) unless we are going to see non Dark Blue Captains of the future carriers! For that reason I see no need for CAS to talk aircraft carriers. But he does talk of the need to "maintain and further develop an agile, adaptable and capable expeditionary air power contribution to the UK's overall defence capability, which takes full account of emerging threats, concepts and technologies" which without spelling it out in simple words would, IMHO, suggest he is fully supportive of the carrier concept. However, without wishing to incur the wrath of the senior sefvice too much (had enough of doing that for the last 12 months) his strategic priorities are set for the next 5-10 year timescale - when exactly are the carriers going to be fully CR (including JSF)....? I'm sure it's been mentioned a thousand times on this thread but I'm too lazy to look!
Suspicion breeds confidence
unless we are going to see non Dark Blue Captains of the future carriers!
RonO
Please re-educate me then. After all your post was mainly cut and paste so please tell me why you think the CAS strategy for the Royal Air Force is soooooooooooooo wrong.
Please re-educate me then. After all your post was mainly cut and paste so please tell me why you think the CAS strategy for the Royal Air Force is soooooooooooooo wrong.
Thread Starter
The events of the last week demonstrate the utility and flexability of embarked aviation, carriers, and naval forces in general. They also demonstrate the need for the UK to have the means to be taken seriously on the diplomatic front, and have influence.
Remember what Stalin said when asked what he thought of the Pope? How many divisions does he have?
The future carriers are key to Britain's future expeditionary war fighting capability. But they are also key to our ability to be strong for peace. The Government seems to ignore that, despite the desire to be "a force for good".
Not_a_boffin air defence stuff has been discussed elsewhere. I agree with you - as the Sea Jet thread shows.
Does/will the mini wing on the Merlin fold, as deck space and hangar space need to be used wisely?
Another topic, is there any thought of putting FLynx on CVF for embarked SAR, force protection with the HMG pod, utility duties etc?
Remember what Stalin said when asked what he thought of the Pope? How many divisions does he have?
The future carriers are key to Britain's future expeditionary war fighting capability. But they are also key to our ability to be strong for peace. The Government seems to ignore that, despite the desire to be "a force for good".
Not_a_boffin air defence stuff has been discussed elsewhere. I agree with you - as the Sea Jet thread shows.
Does/will the mini wing on the Merlin fold, as deck space and hangar space need to be used wisely?
Another topic, is there any thought of putting FLynx on CVF for embarked SAR, force protection with the HMG pod, utility duties etc?
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
They also demonstrate the need for the UK to have the means to be taken seriously on the diplomatic front, and have influence.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ORAC
Blair: “Well, it’s only if, I mean, you know. If she’s got a, or if she needs the ground prepared, as it were. Because obviously if she goes out, she’s got to succeed, if it were, whereas I can go out and just talk.”
"I mean, you know George, if Condi goes she absolutely has to succeed, but as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, I can go and absolutely nobody will give a flying fcuk! In fact, they'll hardly even notice I'm there!"
"Yeah, OK Toby, we'll call you about that, don't call us."
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If they can pass the necessary ship driving exams and put the years in then why not?
Suspicion breeds confidence
You don't have to have wings to skipper a CVS. A good example is Jeremy Black on Invincible at the Falklands. A gunnery officer and a damned good CO. As far as I know, ship driving exams are mandatory for all no matter what branch you are in.
There's a Rum ration thread on the ship driver topic that may throw some light.
http://www.rumration.co.uk/cpgn2/For...pic/t=450.html
AFAIK, the USN definitely had a policy of allowing only aviators to command CV/CVN, but you have to have earn command experience on another ship before you get to be responsible for 100000 tonnes & 6000 bods.
WEBF - I wouldn't ask about plane guard let alone SAR unless you want to be very, very, very disappointed........As for Merlin, I very much doubt whether the wings could fold - in any case the storm lashing footprint for the beast is likely to cover sufficient space that you wouldn't notice the wings.
http://www.rumration.co.uk/cpgn2/For...pic/t=450.html
AFAIK, the USN definitely had a policy of allowing only aviators to command CV/CVN, but you have to have earn command experience on another ship before you get to be responsible for 100000 tonnes & 6000 bods.
WEBF - I wouldn't ask about plane guard let alone SAR unless you want to be very, very, very disappointed........As for Merlin, I very much doubt whether the wings could fold - in any case the storm lashing footprint for the beast is likely to cover sufficient space that you wouldn't notice the wings.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That must be a bit of a nuisance for the aviators. I can just see the selection panel...
..."Hello Admiral, what have you got for me to command?"
"Well, son, we did some thinking, and ah reckon we've come up with the perfect practice vessel."
"Gee - thanks, Sir!"
"It's the Kennedy"
"Wow! A real fightin' ship, but I thought I was meant to work up to a CVN."
"You are. This is the USS Joseph Kennedy."
"Not sure I know that one..."
"Sure you do, son, it's the diplomatic vessel that runs away from harm's way."
"Oh, goody...."
This is a historical joke, by the way. US of A Ppruners please note that Britain was very glad to see the back of JK and is a dig at him, not you! Just to keep it topical to Prune, it was a little organisation caller, oh er... Fighter something that proved him wrong!
..."Hello Admiral, what have you got for me to command?"
"Well, son, we did some thinking, and ah reckon we've come up with the perfect practice vessel."
"Gee - thanks, Sir!"
"It's the Kennedy"
"Wow! A real fightin' ship, but I thought I was meant to work up to a CVN."
"You are. This is the USS Joseph Kennedy."
"Not sure I know that one..."
"Sure you do, son, it's the diplomatic vessel that runs away from harm's way."
"Oh, goody...."
This is a historical joke, by the way. US of A Ppruners please note that Britain was very glad to see the back of JK and is a dig at him, not you! Just to keep it topical to Prune, it was a little organisation caller, oh er... Fighter something that proved him wrong!
Thread Starter
As a rule only Fisheads (Warfare Officers) drive ships, and do things such as OOW training etc. This may include General List WAFUs. At least that's what they said when I was trying for a commision a loooong time ago.
"The worst thing about the Navy is that its full of Fisheads" - retired Lt Cdr Schoolie to me, whilst giving me advice some years ago.
Blair: “Well, it’s only if, I mean, you know. If she’s got a, or if she needs the ground prepared, as it were..........
Vickie Pollard?
"The worst thing about the Navy is that its full of Fisheads" - retired Lt Cdr Schoolie to me, whilst giving me advice some years ago.
Blair: “Well, it’s only if, I mean, you know. If she’s got a, or if she needs the ground prepared, as it were..........
Vickie Pollard?