Future Carrier (Including Costs)
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
From the latest DOTE report FMS software development and updates run about 20 months behind updates to the Mission Data Files which include the regional threat environment. That’s for the US forces. Additionally release for each version to each partner nation for their simulators needs to be individually certified. Being not unduly pessimistic I would assume that the threat would updated at least annually and that would mean the FMS always running about 2/3 years and 2 versions behind both the latest flight management software and threat environment in the aircraft?
“.....The program is behind in developing and fielding training simulators, referred to as F-35 Full Mission Simulators (FMS), to train pilots, both at the integrated training centers for initial F-35 pilot training and at the operational locations. The FMS is a multi-ship, man-in-the-loop, F-35 mission systems software-in-the-loop simulation using virtual threats, it is used to train both U.S. and partner pilots.......
Since the FMS runs F-35 mission systems software, it requires Block 3F mission data, integrated with virtual threats, to build the threat environment simulation (TES). It currently takes up to 20 months for the program to build the TES after new mission data are available.”....
“.....The program is behind in developing and fielding training simulators, referred to as F-35 Full Mission Simulators (FMS), to train pilots, both at the integrated training centers for initial F-35 pilot training and at the operational locations. The FMS is a multi-ship, man-in-the-loop, F-35 mission systems software-in-the-loop simulation using virtual threats, it is used to train both U.S. and partner pilots.......
Since the FMS runs F-35 mission systems software, it requires Block 3F mission data, integrated with virtual threats, to build the threat environment simulation (TES). It currently takes up to 20 months for the program to build the TES after new mission data are available.”....
Going by the latest PMQ's, the "Magic money tree" is in for a damn good shakin. One important factor for the F-35 is cost / capability. Interesting that the capability, and technology transfer, value of the F-35 to the UK could be retained without the ongoing cost of the carriers, if the carriers are scrapped. Certainly, a likely possibility for an insolvent UK.
OAP
OAP
It is a worry when the software in the sim you train in for a single seat aircraft (no trainer) will always be at least 1 to 2 generations behind that in the aircraft......
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going by the latest PMQ's, the "Magic money tree" is in for a damn good shakin. One important factor for the F-35 is cost / capability. Interesting that the capability, and technology transfer, value of the F-35 to the UK could be retained without the ongoing cost of the carriers, if the carriers are scrapped. Certainly, a likely possibility for an insolvent UK.
OAP
OAP
Hmmm. Looks like your ability to discern capital cost from operating cost is up there with your ability to distinguish fact from opinion....
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure what the value of the technology transfer is if we are never going to build an advanced strike aircraft on our own.... tho ' I suppose we can use it in the next multi-national effort in 2040.............
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-RP
Going by the latest PMQ's, the "Magic money tree" is in for a damn good shakin. One important factor for the F-35 is cost / capability. Interesting that the capability, and technology transfer, value of the F-35 to the UK could be retained without the ongoing cost of the carriers, if the carriers are scrapped. Certainly, a likely possibility for an insolvent UK.
OAP
Oh yes! I get your drift...we have spent £Billions on the wrong capability, let's just carry-on spending more £Billions!
Well, it isn't going to happen. Even without a regime change in the UK, the plug on the magic money tree is going to get pulled pretty soon and those floating Gin palaces are going to be scrapped.
OAP
OAP
Well, it isn't going to happen. Even without a regime change in the UK, the plug on the magic money tree is going to get pulled pretty soon and those floating Gin palaces are going to be scrapped.OAP
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They won't be scrapped - too much capital invested and the names!! Think of the headline on the Daily Mail!!!!!
No, they'll spend 95% of their time parked at Portsmouth with a crew that will be too small to operate them but still would be better off used elsewhere
No, they'll spend 95% of their time parked at Portsmouth with a crew that will be too small to operate them but still would be better off used elsewhere
Suspicion breeds confidence
I wouldn't bet on it. Gibraltar will be an ideal forward operating base and I know studies are underway now about using the South Mole. Many many moons ago I remember see three carriers docked there.
Talking to the locals it is largely a matter of dredging as this hasn't been done for many years. The last ship I went on that couldn't dock there was the Canberra.
Using Gib saves a three day transit, and could be at Suez in just over 4 days. It could even attack Taranto on the way. 🤣🤔
Talking to the locals it is largely a matter of dredging as this hasn't been done for many years. The last ship I went on that couldn't dock there was the Canberra.
Using Gib saves a three day transit, and could be at Suez in just over 4 days. It could even attack Taranto on the way. 🤣🤔
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gib would save a few problems for sure
a) it's out of the way of the Great British Media so wouldn't be so obvious a long term parking spot
b) the weather is better so you'll spnd less on paint and the caretakers will be happier
c) The Spaniards might invade and take a carrier as a "bonus"
d) it''s a lot closer to the scrapping sites in Turkey - got to think long term
a) it's out of the way of the Great British Media so wouldn't be so obvious a long term parking spot
b) the weather is better so you'll spnd less on paint and the caretakers will be happier
c) The Spaniards might invade and take a carrier as a "bonus"
d) it''s a lot closer to the scrapping sites in Turkey - got to think long term
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So after spending millions modernising the home port the idea is to ship them off someplace else because it's "handy (and the weathers better)
Makes a LOT of sense... out of sight, out of mind...
Makes a LOT of sense... out of sight, out of mind...
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,581
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
The Americans also have a carrier themed STEM project for schools....
When does Queen Elizabeth start her next phase of sea trials?
When does Queen Elizabeth start her next phase of sea trials?
Portsmouth Harbour shipping movements Tuesday 24 October 2017
"...1500 MTBC HMS QUEEN ELIZABETH..."
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/qhm/por...ate=24/10/2017
https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/qhm/por...ate=24/10/2017
Oh dear, General Sir Richard Barrons, ex CO JFC, talking about defence cuts on R4 this morning. Slotted after depressing news on the economy, he declared that the UK has "no contemporary habit of thinking about defence of the homeland". What was he doing as a VVSO? He talked about; the threats from Russia and China, the need for 80,000 Army with 30,000 reserve, the need for the RAF to be able to deploy the Army and the need for landing craft. One might guess the capabilities he chose to talk about are seriously under threat! 
OAP
OAP
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Possibly the most depressing thing I've read in a year........... but unfortutnately horribly accurate I think
"The real problem, then, for both the Navy and the Ministry of Defence is a surfeit of ambition to deploy military force relative to both fiscal resources and strategic reality."
There is clearly a massive gap between the cash planned and the resources we think we need
Looks like it will end in tears again..................
PS it's a copyright article so be careful how much you cut 'n paste
"The real problem, then, for both the Navy and the Ministry of Defence is a surfeit of ambition to deploy military force relative to both fiscal resources and strategic reality."
There is clearly a massive gap between the cash planned and the resources we think we need
Looks like it will end in tears again..................
PS it's a copyright article so be careful how much you cut 'n paste
Onceapilot, worth a read...
Capabilities Review: Squaring Naval Ambitions, Priorities & Resources | Oxford Research Group
Capabilities Review: Squaring Naval Ambitions, Priorities & Resources | Oxford Research Group
What gets my goat is, we have had a VVSO basically say..."we have spent the money on the wrong things* " and expecting more money. Ha! They are talking defence budget % because it sounds less. They have seriously blown it!
*The carriers
OAP
Last edited by Onceapilot; 24th Oct 2017 at 09:19.