Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Future Carrier (Including Costs)

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Future Carrier (Including Costs)

Old 24th Jan 2020, 08:53
  #5881 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 288
Is this 'little hiccup' an attempt to punish us for not selecting the AESA EL/M-2052 ?
I thought Lockheed Martin were contracted to make the selection for the RN?
Bing is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2020, 11:21
  #5882 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 737
...
Originally Posted by Bing View Post
I thought Lockheed Martin were contracted to make the selection for the RN?
Different departments of LM I gather, perhaps with a chinese wall to prevent any possible conflict of interest

...
Lordflasheart is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2020, 12:36
  #5883 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 1,050
Terry Pratchett‘There are ways - extremely honourable ways - of assuring confidentiality and avoiding conflicts of interest, my lord,’ said Mr Slant.

‘Ah, this would be . . . what is it now . . . the glass ceiling?’ said Lord Vetinari brightly.

‘No, my lord. That is something else. I believe you may be thinking about the “Agatean Wall”,’ said Mr Slant smoothly. ‘This carefully and successfully ensures that there will be no breach of confidentiality should, for example, one part of an organization come into possession of privileged information which could conceivably be used by another department for unethical gain.’

‘This is fascinating! How does it work, exactly?’ said Vetinari.

‘People agree not to do it,’ said Mr Slant.

‘I’m sorry? I thought you said there is a wall—’ said Vetinari.

‘That’s just a name, my lord. For agreeing not to do it.’

‘Ah? And they do? How wonderful. Even though in this case the invisible wall must pass through the middle of their brains?’

‘We have a Code of Conduct, you know!’ said a voice.
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2020, 11:05
  #5884 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 737
Who's the Crowsnest Project Manager ?

...
Thanks for that Asturias

This article from 2015, tells much of the sorry story. https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2015/...nest-decision/

A nice one-liner from the above - "The decision has been made and the often described ‘low-risk, low-cost’ solution has won out"

"CROWSNEST goes back many years, originally starting out as the Future Organic Airborne Early Warning (FOAEW) in 2001 ....."

A July 2000 parliamentary answer confirmed the particulars;

"We plan to acquire a Future Organic Airborne Early Warning (FOAEW) system to replace the capability currently provided by Sea King airborne early warning helicopters. FOAEW will operate from the Future Aircraft Carrier (CVF) and complement the deployment of the Future Carrier Borne Aircraft (FCBA). It will mount powerful radar systems to provide wide sensor coverage against both air and surface threats, and command and control for operations by the carrier air group. Expressions of interest for participation in the programme were sought from industry in February 2000. The planned in-service date for FOAEW is 2012."

And this from 2014 - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/n...craft-carriers

"Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers will get helicopter-borne early warning systems 18 months earlier than planned, saving 22 million ......" followed by "... the Defence Secretary has accelerated the Crowsnest airborne surveillance and control programme to ensure it is operational by 2019.

Only in the land of Angst-More-Pork (pace TP) could we spend twenty years paying to rebuild an existing system and end up wondering if it will ever work at all.

'I have absolute confidence in Mr da Quirm's work, and I'm sure he has too.'
'Oh, dear. No, I never bother to have any confidence,' said Leonardo.

I wonder what the Crowsnest Project Manager would say ?

LFH
...
Lordflasheart is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2020, 04:33
  #5885 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 2,875
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/de...rriers-1369551


Crowsnest, the most advanced aerial early warning sensor ever built for the Senior Service, is reportedly ‘too sensitive to use’.

A high-ranking naval officer told The News delays were a worry and warned of a ‘reluctance’ within industry to seek ‘independent help’ when issues arose. ’[/color]

Auxtank has a point, and not only because a ‘sensitivity’ issue arose on ASaC Mk7, was solved, implementation cancelled by a non-engineer, and then immediately became an issue during trials. (Limited benefit in picking up targets if you can’t identify them. Can't say more in case this is the same problem).

The RN officer is probably aware that much of ASaC Mk7 was designed and delivered by a handful of RN aircrew in their spare time; and companies other than the prime, who often weren't under contract until after the event. Remember, the prime didn’t bid for the ASaC job, they were awarded it by political overrule, and later bought by Thales (who, as Thomson-CSF, had withdrawn in 1994 as it was too difficult). The solution, something never attempted before (like quite a lot in Mk7), was developed by another company, which is what really pi**ed off senior management, as the Minister's chosen company HAD to be seen to succeed.

What really intrigues me is how much attention did Crowsnest pay to ASaC Mk7, given the winning bid in 1994 (before the 1995 overrule, and the RN changing its mind back to Sea King) was.....Merlin. I wonder how close this 'new' solution is to GEC/Ferranti's drawings of the day?

But I wouldn't be too hard on MoD's project manager. If it's manned at the same level as ASaC Mk7, Crowsnest is a minor job to him, among many!

Last edited by tucumseh; 26th Jan 2020 at 08:26.
tucumseh is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2020, 13:59
  #5886 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,547
Tman,

I think I will get another cuppa and try to read that post a second time in the vain hope I shall begin to understand what it was you said.

I think the short version is this is yet another demonstration of the sheer genius of some that was good.....and for some who could complicate a Piss Up in a Brewery!
SASless is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2020, 15:39
  #5887 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 2,875
SASless

Since I posted that reply, I've been shown the Crowsnest timescales, as of March 2019. I'd say they were only attainable if, in March 2019, they were already 90% of the way through trials, and everything was going really well. Given the reported problems, that is unlikely, so there would seem to have been a degree of optimism.

The main technical issue mentioned, which MAY be some sort of receiver sensitivity mismatch, is a well-known gotcha, and was both predicted and occurred on Sea King ASaC Mk7. (But not by the prime contractor, which is what caused difficulty). That being so, and assuming Crowsnest is meant to upgrade aspects of the Mk7 system, then that would (or should) be one of the top technical risks, as it was on Mk7.

That doesn't mean it could have been fully mitigated, because quite often 'requirements' handed to procurers defy the laws of physics. Any solution would require extensive trialling, as (and I stand to be corrected on these matters) the resultant installed performance in turn dictates tactics and training - the latter is mentioned in the linked article - and not just of this aircraft.

It makes me wonder if Crowsnest read the Post Project Evaluations from ASaC Mk7 - which set all this out in great detail as it was known FOAEW/MASC was coming along. It is well known FOAEW and then MASC didn't, as their cunning plan was to lift the mission system out of ASaC and simply drop it in a Merlin. For a start, the consoles were part of the aircraft structure, which automatically makes the airframe part of the programme very significant.

All a long time ago I'm afraid, and MoD is unlikely to have anyone left who remembers this. Certainly none of the ASaC team is left. Wheels get reinvented, and turn out square.
tucumseh is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2020, 09:02
  #5888 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,456
HMS Queen Elizabeth is at sea in UK waters with both F-35B and Merlin HM2 aboard. See the news section of the Royal Navy website for details.
WE Branch Fanatic is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2020, 20:56
  #5889 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 215
Originally Posted by WE Branch Fanatic View Post
HMS Queen Elizabeth is at sea in UK waters with both F-35B and Merlin HM2 aboard. See the news section of the Royal Navy website for details.
1 of each by any chance?
andrewn is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2020, 12:19
  #5890 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 1,050
This mornings Daily ExpressHow US could use UK ships to bolster its fleet as defence concerns grow

THE ROYAL NAVY boasts some of the most advanced ships and destroyers in the world. But with recent cuts to military budgets coinciding with the US' huge naval standoff in regions such as the South China Sea, Britain's forces are reportedly planning to lease an aircraft carrier to Washington.

By CHARLIE BRADLEY PUBLISHED: 00:01, Tue, Feb 4, 2020 | UPDATED: 00:10, Tue, Feb 4, 2020 OSE

According to reports in recent months, the British Army is said to be pushing for one of the Royal Navy’s brand new super carriers to be leased out to the US in a bid to garner extra cash for military funding. A Sunday Times’ report revealed that decision makers in the UK’s military brass could flog either HMS Prince of Wales or HMS Queen Elizabeth. The US, which is currently embroiled in a huge naval standoff in the South China Sea, could take on one of the ships in yet another expansion of its fleet.

This comes despite the Government’s promises to maintain the size of the armed forces.

An unnamed source told the Sunday Times in November: “The army hates aircraft carriers, which they have always seen as a white elephant, but the Americans love them. They are cutting edge because they can operate with far fewer crew than US carriers.”

The reports have been denied by the UK’s Defence Secretary, Ben Wallace MP, who said: “This is total rubbish. There are no plans to shrink the armed forces. “There are however plans to increase army recruiting levels.”

HMS Queen Elizabeth visited the US last year, with Tony Radakin, the First Sea Lord and UK Chief of Naval Staff, claiming that the two allies’ naval forces could be closely integrated. He said: “As she has demonstrated already, we can successfully field a combined US, UK carrier strike group. I look forward to this developing further.”

Cuts to the Defence budget in recent years have heaped more pressure on British forces, with many expressing a dire need for increased spending to avoid security deficiencies. In 2018 there was a 20billion shortfall in the UK’s 179billion equipment budget, and figures last August showed that the British forces were 7,000 soldiers short of its 82,000 target. In November, Prime Minister Boris Johnson was forced to deny claims that the British forces would cut its personnel to between 60,000-65,000, the smallest number for centuries.

Mr Johnson said while launching his 2019 manifesto: “We will not be cutting our armed forces in any form. We will be maintaining the size of our armed services.” For the last nine years, the British military has decreased in size with personnel decreasing in the Army, the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force (RAF).
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2020, 13:52
  #5891 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,547
Exactly why would we need a UK designed, built, and crewed Ship?

Who would maintain, service, and repair the ship?

Why would the RN accept being seconded to the US Navy?

I know the President is keen on good bargains in his business dealings.....but I think he will see this scheme to be just plain cockeyed crazy!

If he were to negotiate such a deal...you lot are going to hate the terms and conditions along with the compensation.....as he knows how badly you need the dosh.

One should always negotiate from a position of strength....and that would be your undoing.
SASless is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2020, 16:46
  #5892 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,230
Exactly SASless, this is a load of tripe spouted by a rag with a rapidly declining reputation for getting anything in defence right.
pr00ne is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2020, 21:04
  #5893 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Warrington, UK
Posts: 3,440
They are cutting edge because they can operate with far fewer crew than US carriers.
Yeah, far fewer aircraft as well.
MightyGem is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 00:48
  #5894 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,547
But....but.....but American Aircraft you have to admit!
SASless is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 01:19
  #5895 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,230
SASless,

They are a bit British too...
pr00ne is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 06:34
  #5896 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 387
SASLESS

Because it has a bar!
vascodegama is online now  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 08:40
  #5897 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 1,050
Exactly why would we need a UK designed, built, and crewed Ship? - it would be very very cheap to acquire

Who would maintain, service, and repair the ship? - an excellent point - neither country has any spare capacity TBH and the constructors probably binned the blueprints (or sold them to the Chinese) already

Why would the RN accept being seconded to the US Navy? -a) because the Govt tell them to b) its the only way they'll get any experience as the cash has run out in Whitehall
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 10:13
  #5898 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,198
QE will be touring the world with a USMC F-35B wing for her first tour anyway - and if it works for 1-2 years, o reason the same arrangement can’t be stretched out a few years at a time on a lease arrangement.
ORAC is online now  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 10:33
  #5899 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London/Oxford/New York
Posts: 2,230
ORAC,

Hardly a USMC Wing, it will be carrying one UK squadron and one USMC squadron, at times...
pr00ne is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2020, 13:24
  #5900 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,547
So....when this miracle of jointness goes to sea....and we have to stock a completely unique set of spares for it....thus taking up storage capacity we need for our own needs (based upon common kit in our ships)....that would input a burden on us rather than a benefit.

I would love to see either or both of these RN Aircraft Carriers do a long at Sea deployment as some of our Carriers have done.

The Nimitz did a 270 day deployment with 144 continuous days at sea during one stretch of operations.

Are you guys ready for that contingency?


http://www.uscarriers.net/cvn68history.htm
SASless is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.