2 carrier contracts awarded.
relevant for today
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Chester, UK
Age: 63
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to clarify, carriers are partly about
which
hmm. Methinks some of your arguments are being padded out with slightly tenuous points.
I wonder if UK industry is aware that they cannot project themselves on a tarmac runway, and need an aircraft carrier?
projection of UK industry
cannot be done with 7000 ft of tarmac
I wonder if UK industry is aware that they cannot project themselves on a tarmac runway, and need an aircraft carrier?
The CVs are bang up to date, relevant for today, have a life way beyond any of the above (50yrs planned life) and are full of low risk technology
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh! If only they'd come to their senses and scrap this daft £multi-billion limited payload, very limited number, ultra high-tech swiss-watch F35 and just fit cats, traps and a sensible number of F18s, some Hawkeyes and a COD capability...
Just who are we going to come up against that might require the esoteric limits of an F35 and that the best traditions of FAA training, tactics and practicality could not solve with F18s, and for a saving ot what, £Billions?
Leaving us able to add a sensible RM helo-borne force too.
Am I being naiive?
Just who are we going to come up against that might require the esoteric limits of an F35 and that the best traditions of FAA training, tactics and practicality could not solve with F18s, and for a saving ot what, £Billions?
Leaving us able to add a sensible RM helo-borne force too.
Am I being naiive?
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 83
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite possibly full of fixed wing and VTOL aircraft
F18 Super Hornet at guaranteed cost and delivery, far lower than postulated and unknown for F35 costing.
Available for; Hawkeye surveillance onboard.
Onboard Tankers.
COD capability.
Full Rotary capability (including ASW).
Plus a couple of hooked Warthogs to take out pirates (low cost effective solution)
Even, dare I say it - a couple of Harrier Mk2 2+ to allow for ops where no tarmac exists.
Ability to take onboard other nations aircraft as needed.
Available for; Hawkeye surveillance onboard.
Onboard Tankers.
COD capability.
Full Rotary capability (including ASW).
Plus a couple of hooked Warthogs to take out pirates (low cost effective solution)
Even, dare I say it - a couple of Harrier Mk2 2+ to allow for ops where no tarmac exists.
Ability to take onboard other nations aircraft as needed.
Power projection - Diplomatic visiting trade shows with Sunset Marines.
(Continues HMS Britannia's role that was so effective and would be very appropriate to HMS Queen Elizabeth)
(Continues HMS Britannia's role that was so effective and would be very appropriate to HMS Queen Elizabeth)
Cost Effective & Versatile - the name of the game!!
(Just another view !!)
Last edited by Entaxei; 12th Sep 2010 at 19:19. Reason: Spell (casting)
Time after time after time, we have on this forum, armchair strategists spouting complete drivel. The worst of which, is the Guardian's attitude that we should retrench ourselves into an insular country, with a small coastal/UKADR defence force/dad's army. They completely miss the point that the UK's future wealth is tied up in several, far flung lumps of rock, which have huge, as yet untapped mineral resources. The Falklands was not fought over the rights of a small few people, it was fought because of the oil, the fish, the minerals and the fact that it is the closest deep water port and airfield to the most massive reserves of unexploited oil and minerals in the world........Antarctica! There are a dozen nations in the world who all lay claim to this continent or parts of it. Only those nations with the military and economic resource will be placed to exploit those resources when the time comes....which it will. You only have to look at the Russian and US and Canadian posturing in the Arctic, to see the future.
The future is not about Afghanistan...if we want to be poor, then let us squander the legacy left for us by generations of Britons who fought and died to make this country what it once was and still can be.
The future is not about Afghanistan...if we want to be poor, then let us squander the legacy left for us by generations of Britons who fought and died to make this country what it once was and still can be.
F18 Super Hornet at guaranteed cost and delivery, far lower than postulated and unknown for F35 costing.
Available for; Hawkeye surveillance onboard.
Onboard Tankers.
COD capability.
Full Rotary capability (including ASW).
Plus a couple of hooked Warthogs to take out pirates (low cost effective solution)
Even, dare I say it - a couple of Harrier Mk2 2+ to allow for ops where no tarmac exists.
Ability to take onboard other nations aircraft for as needed.
Available for; Hawkeye surveillance onboard.
Onboard Tankers.
COD capability.
Full Rotary capability (including ASW).
Plus a couple of hooked Warthogs to take out pirates (low cost effective solution)
Even, dare I say it - a couple of Harrier Mk2 2+ to allow for ops where no tarmac exists.
Ability to take onboard other nations aircraft for as needed.
Seriously, a lot of people on this thread seem to be inhabitants of some parallell universe where there is no £150 Billion deficit.
Land-based air away from UK is only available in a politically permissive environment and even then, subject to some fairly obvious restrictions (or vulnerabilities) in terms of logistics. Depending on geography, it's also a fairly major drain on tasking.....
If we want to play "globally", then we need a global set of capabilities with all the kit. If we don't want to play globally, then the capability requirement decreases exponentially. There is no point having a bunch of DD/FF if we are not playing globally. Similarly, if we're not playing globally, why have any sort of strategic AT, high readiness infantry etc. If folk think they're gaining "influence" by pitching in half a sqn of GR4 or a Battn of infantry, then all well and good, but don't expect to have a speaking part.
Decision time is upon us (or rather the brains trust in MB
.....)
If we want to play "globally", then we need a global set of capabilities with all the kit. If we don't want to play globally, then the capability requirement decreases exponentially. There is no point having a bunch of DD/FF if we are not playing globally. Similarly, if we're not playing globally, why have any sort of strategic AT, high readiness infantry etc. If folk think they're gaining "influence" by pitching in half a sqn of GR4 or a Battn of infantry, then all well and good, but don't expect to have a speaking part.
Decision time is upon us (or rather the brains trust in MB
.....)
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this such a big suprise?? QE is half built. They'd have to break up whole hull blocks with engines fitted if they were to scrap them now ......
Home - Aircraft Carrier Alliance
Home - Aircraft Carrier Alliance
a lot of people on this thread seem to be inhabitants of some parallell universe
Like it or not there has got to be a reduction in capability/global player aspirations to make the books balance. The 'we can get more with the same money by buying off the shelf' won't work. Whether it is the carriers, JFH, the GR4, FRES, ceremonial commitments, FSTA, E3D the Red Arrows, BBMF, PTIs, RAF Regt, heavy armour, Trident or whatever - one or more of them is going to take a hit (and it will be more than a 'capability holiday').
Trouble is will the decision ever me made or will we continue to "salami slice" and "hollow out" what we've got and hope nobody calls our bluff ..... again
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 83
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seriously, a lot of people on this thread seem to be inhabitants of some parallell universe where there is no £150 Billion deficit.
Yes - George Brown springs to mind among many others !!
OK - If you're being picky - drop the Warthogs!
BUT
Don't forget - the other elements are options - pick & mix - now and later.
Yes - George Brown springs to mind among many others !!
OK - If you're being picky - drop the Warthogs!
BUT
Don't forget - the other elements are options - pick & mix - now and later.
AND
The F18 option does recognise very much the cost of the F35
(Even if Congress allow the Rolls engine)
(Even if Congress allow the Rolls engine)
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for topic change, we have a £150 Billion defecit, is anyone like me wondering when the banks are going to pay back the £57 Billion they owe the country, that kind of helps the situation but I guess somewhere that will be forgotten about.
The next few weeks are going to be fuelled with rumours and rubbish, but the day the SDR is announced its going to be one huge beer call
The next few weeks are going to be fuelled with rumours and rubbish, but the day the SDR is announced its going to be one huge beer call
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southampton
Age: 54
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The banks are due to pay back our money no later than 2015, which funnily enough is when the ConDems have said the next General Election will be, as they favour five year fixed term Parliaments. We are not bankrupt, we just gave all out money to the banks, who are now doing very nicely thank you.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hero or Zero.
MGD said: .. if the government has no appetite for foreign adventures, as it seems, then they run the risk of being a huge financial white elephant. That is a political, as well as financial risk.
As much as anything, they only reflect the justification for the cause, the political intent and then, they respond to it. They don't create the conditions but they do need the social and political framework to justify themselves. Its not about how good a design they are - its about what we, as a Nation, want to use them for, or might have to use them for, and if we are able and happy to live with the consequences.
Thing is, do you want to gamble on the consequences of not having them? A billion here or there is probably nothing in the grand scheme of things at the moment, or the consequences of losing out with something far greater, because we didn't have the option when we needed it.
