Future Carrier (Including Costs)
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,788
Likes: 1,205
From: Baston
BBC this evening.On Thursday, the British High Commission said in a statement to the BBC: "The UK has accepted an offer to move the aircraft to the Maintenance Repair and Overhaul facility at the airport. It will be moved to the hangar once UK engineering teams arrive with specialist equipment, thereby ensuring there is minimal disruption to scheduled maintenance of other aircraft.
"The aircraft will return to active service once repairs and safety checks have been completed," it added. "Ground teams continue to work closely with Indian authorities to ensure safety and security precautions are observed."
"The aircraft will return to active service once repairs and safety checks have been completed," it added. "Ground teams continue to work closely with Indian authorities to ensure safety and security precautions are observed."
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,550
Likes: 7,281
From: Peripatetic
A-400M? Can't bring it home if they can't fix and can't provide AAR to bring it home or out to the carrier if they do.....
VideoA @RoyalAirForce A400M has arrived at Thiruvananthapuram with a repair crew to attempt repairing the grounded @RoyalNavy F-35.
VideoA @RoyalAirForce A400M has arrived at Thiruvananthapuram with a repair crew to attempt repairing the grounded @RoyalNavy F-35.
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 376
From: Hampshire
Not stopping, had a night stop in Muscat arrived VOTV 0715Z left 1055Z If the UK doesn't send a Voyager, with 19 nations invited to Talisman Sabre 2025 there may be opportunity to get AAR & SAR cover from other sources; by the by both the Vinson and Nimitz CSGs were in the Arabian Sea at the end of June.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 678
Likes: 56
From: York
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,223
Likes: 1,649
From: Ferrara
Nothing moves quickly in India - and what do they have to gain? Even if they dismantled it to individual components they've proved time and again it takes them decades to design and build even quite simple aircraft
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 243
Likes: 41
From: South Glos
What spares are required? What was the availability of the required spares? Has this repair been done before? Was the design authority required to assess/design/approve the repair scheme? Were specialist or bespoke tooling required? Et cetera
Joined: Jul 2008
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 2,979
Likes: 175
From: Australia OZ
10 Jul 2025 "...U.S. Marine Corps F-35B Lightning II fighters operated from the U.K. Royal Navy (RN) aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales (R09) on Tuesday as part of the run-up to the U.S.-Australian led Exercise Talisman Sabre, according to the Royal Navy.... No details were given as to where Prince of Wales was located but the carrier was likely to be in the Timor Sea and heading to Darwin, Australia for Talisman Sabre. America was operating in the Coral Sea on Monday. VMFA-242 aircraft No. 32 seen on Prince of Wales has been shown on Pentagon imagery releases to be embarked on America...." https://news.usni.org/2025/07/10/u-s...in-the-pacific
Joined: Jul 2008
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 2,979
Likes: 175
From: Australia OZ
12 Jul 2025 Photo Caption: "Stranded F-35 taken into Hangar for repair (Photo: UK Defence in India)." https://www.navylookout.com/app/uplo...n-India-1.avif
12 Jul 2025: https://www.navylookout.com/uk-carri...onal-exercise/
"...On 6th July, an engineering team, tools, and spares flown out from the UK finally arrived in India to begin the repair of the F-35 from HMS Prince of Wales, stranded at Thiruvananthapuram Airport since 14th June. The jet has been out on the apron since landing, but was finally taken into a hangar for attention...."
12 Jul 2025: https://www.navylookout.com/uk-carri...onal-exercise/
"...On 6th July, an engineering team, tools, and spares flown out from the UK finally arrived in India to begin the repair of the F-35 from HMS Prince of Wales, stranded at Thiruvananthapuram Airport since 14th June. The jet has been out on the apron since landing, but was finally taken into a hangar for attention...."
Joined: May 2009
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 314
Likes: 254
From: uk
Any chance of getting off the rather boring subject of - why the spares took so long - and get back to the rather vital topics of.
. should the carrier be the other side of the world when tensions in Europe are so high ? - according to some we are AT WAR !
and should we concentrate on EUROPE / home defence rather than WORLDWIDE operations ?
. Are carriers too vulnerable in a real war ?
. Does the RN really enjoy having carriers to the detriment of other assets ?
. should the carrier be the other side of the world when tensions in Europe are so high ? - according to some we are AT WAR !
and should we concentrate on EUROPE / home defence rather than WORLDWIDE operations ?
. Are carriers too vulnerable in a real war ?
. Does the RN really enjoy having carriers to the detriment of other assets ?
Joined: Dec 2001
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 2,968
Likes: 485
From: The Roman Empire
mb,
If people cross read this thread with the F-35 thread (as I'm sure you have), they will see that the discussion on UK carriers, necessity, where deployed, etc, should also take into account the poor state of the UK F-35 fleet.
While not wishing to denigrate the rotary wing contribution, the main purpose of the carriers is to deploy F-35s. A fleet now exposed as having insufficient groundcrew, poor spares support, poor availability and limited pilot experience (7.5 hours a month - carrier currency?).
We've gone to considerable cost and effort to get these carriers, only to find their main offensive weapon system lacks both numbers, efficiency and probably effectiveness.
If people cross read this thread with the F-35 thread (as I'm sure you have), they will see that the discussion on UK carriers, necessity, where deployed, etc, should also take into account the poor state of the UK F-35 fleet.
While not wishing to denigrate the rotary wing contribution, the main purpose of the carriers is to deploy F-35s. A fleet now exposed as having insufficient groundcrew, poor spares support, poor availability and limited pilot experience (7.5 hours a month - carrier currency?).
We've gone to considerable cost and effort to get these carriers, only to find their main offensive weapon system lacks both numbers, efficiency and probably effectiveness.
Last edited by Biggus; 14th July 2025 at 06:37.
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,311
Likes: 365
From: uk
Any chance of getting off the rather boring subject of - why the spares took so long - and get back to the rather vital topics of.
. should the carrier be the other side of the world when tensions in Europe are so high ? - according to some we are AT WAR !
and should we concentrate on EUROPE / home defence rather than WORLDWIDE operations ?
. Are carriers too vulnerable in a real war ?
. Does the RN really enjoy having carriers to the detriment of other assets ?
. should the carrier be the other side of the world when tensions in Europe are so high ? - according to some we are AT WAR !
and should we concentrate on EUROPE / home defence rather than WORLDWIDE operations ?
. Are carriers too vulnerable in a real war ?
. Does the RN really enjoy having carriers to the detriment of other assets ?
But while spares support (and the ability to put them to use) may be boring and indeed uninspiring to some, nevertheless it is MoD policy that a minimum 15 years support is guaranteed (as far as possible) before being granted funding to proceed to production, and must be in place (x) months before the ISD. Unless of course that mandate has been diluted along with many others relating to certification and acceptance off-contract. I do recall some years ago a beancounter making a name for himself by saying 'The MTBF is xxxx hours, therefore we don't need support for x years after ISD'. Two problems. MTBF is not the measure by which one calculates spares support, it's MTBR. And that one failure in xxxx hours may occur upon unloading the truck delivering the first batch of spares. (Some old Sea King HAS Mk5 hands from Culdrose might remember that one. The only radar Modulator Deck was dropped, and it took 5 years to get a replacement).
Joined: Dec 2001
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 2,968
Likes: 485
From: The Roman Empire
I expect 15 years of support, from the manufacturer, is available.
Whether the MOD has paid for a reasonable support package might well be a very different matter - and according to the NAO report the answer appears to be no.
Whether the MOD has paid for a reasonable support package might well be a very different matter - and according to the NAO report the answer appears to be no.
Joined: May 1999
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 27,395
Likes: 857
From: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
85 years ago, Sqn Ldr Douglas Bader famously signalled HQ12 Gp and Fighter Command as follows:
Maybe something similar should be fired off to Their Airships regarding F-35B spares?
"242 Squadron operational as regards pilots but non-operational as regards equipment".
Joined: Dec 2001
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 2,968
Likes: 485
From: The Roman Empire
There is a story circulating (true or urban myth?) that, although Bader got his spares, it was at the expense of every other squadron on the same airfield.
Joined: Aug 2009
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 445
Likes: 111
From: Derbyshire
Never mind F-35B spares - what about carrier spares?
Saw 50% of our carrier fleet in Portsmouth last week - Queen Elizabeth. It looked non-operational to me.
No doubt WEBF will have a lengthy reason for its being there.
Saw 50% of our carrier fleet in Portsmouth last week - Queen Elizabeth. It looked non-operational to me.
No doubt WEBF will have a lengthy reason for its being there.
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,968
Likes: 102
From: Devon
Any chance of getting off the rather boring subject of - why the spares took so long - and get back to the rather vital topics of.
. should the carrier be the other side of the world when tensions in Europe are so high ? - according to some we are AT WAR !
and should we concentrate on EUROPE / home defence rather than WORLDWIDE operations ?
. Are carriers too vulnerable in a real war ?
. Does the RN really enjoy having carriers to the detriment of other assets ?
. should the carrier be the other side of the world when tensions in Europe are so high ? - according to some we are AT WAR !
and should we concentrate on EUROPE / home defence rather than WORLDWIDE operations ?
. Are carriers too vulnerable in a real war ?
. Does the RN really enjoy having carriers to the detriment of other assets ?
Royal Navy hands over command of NATO’s new Atlantic force after laying down the battleplan
The pace does not relent for the Strike Force staff, however, as they assume other NATO duties, leading the multi-national Allied Reaction Force (Maritime), with UK carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth as its command ship/floating headquarters...
Should we concentre on Europe/Home Defence? Yes! The integrated review under Ben Wallace put the Euro-Atlantic first, as did the recent review, also the Maritime Operating Concept lists Homeland and Operational Advantage in the North Atlantic is the first of the Navy's outputs - and the carriers are part of that.
Are the carriers too vulnerable in a real war? Are ships full of supplies vulnerable? Are amphibious forces vulnerable? A carrier is a far harder target than them, and will often protect them.
Does the RN enjoy having carriers to the detriment...? There are two points here. Firstly the carriers are not responsible for other warships getting prematurely axed, replacements being delayed, or personnel numbers being cut. Trying to find saving within defence to fund other things is, and with the carriers the idiot Cameron wanted to cut more frigates in 2010.
The other point is how do frigates and destroyers do what a carrier does? The carrier puts fighters in close proximity to the assets or area to be defended without needing an excessive number of aircraft, and Geography, Mathematics, and Physics show that attacking aircraft carrying anti ship missiles are best dealt with using fighters to kill the archers, not the arrows. Airborne radar can see far beyond the radar horizon of shipborne ones and can detect low altitude targets at range, and fighters provide the means for interception and visual identification beyond the horizon, and engagement far beyond the range of shipborne missile systems.
Constant ASW helicopter operations are best supported by a large deck with multiple helicopters, as collocating them simplifies coordination, communications, and maintenance and support. Physics also shows that modern long range sonars fitted to ASW warships need to be used in conjunction with dipping sonar to achieve their potential - and vice versa. As with all such detection systems (radar/sonar/optical) there is trade off between range and resolution. The long range sonar provides long range detection, and the dipping sonar provides pinpoint accuracy.
From elsewhere: The Aircraft Carrier and Sea Control (carriers needed in the Atlantic and elsewhere for Air Defence and ASW - due to Maths/Physics/Geography)
mb,
If people cross read this thread with the F-35 thread (as I'm sure you have), they will see that the discussion on UK carriers, necessity, where deployed, etc, should also take into account the poor state of the UK F-35 fleet.
While not wishing to denigrate the rotary wing contribution, the main purpose of the carriers is to deploy F-35s. A fleet now exposed as having insufficient groundcrew, poor spares support, poor availability and limited pilot experience (7.5 hours a month - carrier currency?).
We've gone to considerable cost and effort to get these carriers, only to find their main offensive weapon system lacks both numbers, efficiency and probably effectiveness.
If people cross read this thread with the F-35 thread (as I'm sure you have), they will see that the discussion on UK carriers, necessity, where deployed, etc, should also take into account the poor state of the UK F-35 fleet.
While not wishing to denigrate the rotary wing contribution, the main purpose of the carriers is to deploy F-35s. A fleet now exposed as having insufficient groundcrew, poor spares support, poor availability and limited pilot experience (7.5 hours a month - carrier currency?).
We've gone to considerable cost and effort to get these carriers, only to find their main offensive weapon system lacks both numbers, efficiency and probably effectiveness.
At the risk of being facetious thank God that we opted for F-35B and STOVL carriers, without the training burden to arrested landings.
Give us the spares, and we will finish the job.
She is waiting for a refit period in Rosyth and is at low readiness, and still acting as a NATO command platform - see the link near to top of this post.