No cats and flaps ...... back to F35B?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the X-37B learning how to deal with DF-21 in space???
America's X-37B top-secret spaceplane returns to Earth ? The Register
America's X-37B top-secret spaceplane returns to Earth ? The Register
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: God's own county
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that everyone talks about AD but ignores the JCAs unparalleled (bar the F22 in some respects) sensor suite. Lets not forget that these aircraft have the ability to share their air/ground picture between ac and to a command station, thus having the capability to provide long reaching and extensive AEW.
It is all too easy to throw digs at a new ac that has not got the operational experience to prove itself. Very similar things were said about the Harrier's capability prior to CORPORATE but things tend not to be as simple (or as bleak) as people assume.
One could also add that the developments in international missile technology are almost a universal move away from localised air engagements in the future towards a long range capability designed to be integrated into both the upgraded Typhoon and the long range sensor capability of JCA.
It is all too easy to throw digs at a new ac that has not got the operational experience to prove itself. Very similar things were said about the Harrier's capability prior to CORPORATE but things tend not to be as simple (or as bleak) as people assume.
One could also add that the developments in international missile technology are almost a universal move away from localised air engagements in the future towards a long range capability designed to be integrated into both the upgraded Typhoon and the long range sensor capability of JCA.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: God's own county
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In old money, yes, but what if you can layer your AEW allowing handover/takeover at sufficient intervals? This would negate the need for long endurance.
Of course if you utilise a FJ platform you have the benefit of range!
Of course if you utilise a FJ platform you have the benefit of range!
Last edited by Alexander.Yakovlev; 19th Jun 2012 at 08:05. Reason: Quick addition required!
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 45
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think at least one Australian D/E subs has "sunk" a few US and other ships during RIMPAC exercises, including a US Aircraft carrier. Not sure how much emphasis you put on these Exercises.
Either way, the US would not have liked the fact that the Australian Sub managed to get close enough to "potentially" do damage.
Either way, the US would not have liked the fact that the Australian Sub managed to get close enough to "potentially" do damage.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A.Y, Several Lightning IIs to do the job of one Hawkeye seems a little skewed to me.
Either stick '35s sensor suite on a drone orbiting the fleet, or, if bandwidth is a problem on a datalink, put the same sensor suite on a Hawkeye or other 'long' endurance carrier-capable platform with a mission crew on board.
Either stick '35s sensor suite on a drone orbiting the fleet, or, if bandwidth is a problem on a datalink, put the same sensor suite on a Hawkeye or other 'long' endurance carrier-capable platform with a mission crew on board.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Back of beyond!
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WW,
I agree with you that in a perfect world, where we had money for conventional carrier platforms in numbers, the E-2D would be a perfect AEW asset. The British reality now is that we can't put a FW dedicated AEW platform on QEC so it HAS to be either novel (UAS) or RW. CROWSNEST is, I'm sure, a fantastic development in the world of advanced AEW so whether this can be integrated into a UAS is another thing. Either host is slow to get to max range and would require careful planning but yes, it does offer the necessary endurance required of a traditional AEW feed.
However, I am in complete agreement with A.Y who obviously knows his proverbial ****; the F-35 sensor suite in many, many ways is significantly upgraded from F-22, is better than Growler and the potential of its DL for data-passing air picture AND 'surpic' amongst not just other F-35 but also the surface fleet and CAOC is a step beyond. This shouldn't be sniffed at just because F-35 loiter is inferior to multi-engined types, RW or UAS AEW radar hosts - a pair of F-35 in an AEW 'grinder' is a significant long range sensor and reactive killer scout for any carrier regardless. It isn't the best solution by any means but even if we did have a conventional deck coming our way, and even if we did procure E-2D (as an example), F-35C would without doubt be a significant contributor to the AEW piece; it is one of its many strengths as A.Y rightly mentions.
I agree with you that in a perfect world, where we had money for conventional carrier platforms in numbers, the E-2D would be a perfect AEW asset. The British reality now is that we can't put a FW dedicated AEW platform on QEC so it HAS to be either novel (UAS) or RW. CROWSNEST is, I'm sure, a fantastic development in the world of advanced AEW so whether this can be integrated into a UAS is another thing. Either host is slow to get to max range and would require careful planning but yes, it does offer the necessary endurance required of a traditional AEW feed.
However, I am in complete agreement with A.Y who obviously knows his proverbial ****; the F-35 sensor suite in many, many ways is significantly upgraded from F-22, is better than Growler and the potential of its DL for data-passing air picture AND 'surpic' amongst not just other F-35 but also the surface fleet and CAOC is a step beyond. This shouldn't be sniffed at just because F-35 loiter is inferior to multi-engined types, RW or UAS AEW radar hosts - a pair of F-35 in an AEW 'grinder' is a significant long range sensor and reactive killer scout for any carrier regardless. It isn't the best solution by any means but even if we did have a conventional deck coming our way, and even if we did procure E-2D (as an example), F-35C would without doubt be a significant contributor to the AEW piece; it is one of its many strengths as A.Y rightly mentions.
Last edited by ICBM; 19th Jun 2012 at 10:17.
Suspicion breeds confidence
How can you have an AEW platform accompany a stealth aircraft on a strike? It would give the game away and negate the value of stealth. I thought this was the rationale behind giving the F-35 such a rich sensor suite. I can see an AEW helo or UAV playing a defensive role over the carrier group but that's about all.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I have never understood is the school of thought that a carrier could be sunk therefore shouldn't be bought. Every military system in the world has some way of being hard or soft killed - why do carriers get singled out for a special logic?
I can disable an airfield with bombs or chemicals. I can park cars on the runway with IEDs in them. I can kill the pilots in their married quarters with SF. In a full up shooting match I'll give it some arty and tanks. (Let's see how well CCS bears up to that one!) I know exactly where it is and can get a grid for every taxyway inetrsection from google. I can put my mate on the end of the runway and he can tell me whenever a jet takes off and what it was carrying. But the air force seem to a) (understandably) love them and b) think they are in someway impervious whilst QECV is never more than a step away from a watery grave.
Yes a big torpedo, or a big mine, or a really sharp dolphin could put a carrier out of action - but we bought Typhoon knowing SA-20 existed....and we have been training infantrymen ever since the baddies replaced sharpened guava halves with AK-47.
You can sink boats - hardly sets them apart does it? And until the much vaunted RAF convinces me that it could sink a QECV (which it can't - full stop) I remain convinced that the mitigated threat ain't that bad.
I can disable an airfield with bombs or chemicals. I can park cars on the runway with IEDs in them. I can kill the pilots in their married quarters with SF. In a full up shooting match I'll give it some arty and tanks. (Let's see how well CCS bears up to that one!) I know exactly where it is and can get a grid for every taxyway inetrsection from google. I can put my mate on the end of the runway and he can tell me whenever a jet takes off and what it was carrying. But the air force seem to a) (understandably) love them and b) think they are in someway impervious whilst QECV is never more than a step away from a watery grave.
Yes a big torpedo, or a big mine, or a really sharp dolphin could put a carrier out of action - but we bought Typhoon knowing SA-20 existed....and we have been training infantrymen ever since the baddies replaced sharpened guava halves with AK-47.
You can sink boats - hardly sets them apart does it? And until the much vaunted RAF convinces me that it could sink a QECV (which it can't - full stop) I remain convinced that the mitigated threat ain't that bad.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the problem is Orca that we only have TWO aircraft carriers and they coats a bloody fortune - we actually have quite a few airbases still - and can build them quite cheaply if need be
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go look at the price of Typoon/Sentinel/E3 before you talk about the price of Carriers.
It puts it all into perspective a little.
A carrier is a very long term and infinitely flexible investment. When you consider the cost over 50yrs, they are awesome value for money.
Typhoon/Sentinel/E3 etc are one trick ponys.
A very nice, and possibly indispensible pony yes, but lets be honest, a hawk with sidewinder could have done the job of AD for the UK for the last 10yrs and we would still be safe and well, and the E3 is barely operational anyway.
In 2050, the carriers have every chance of being operationally effective.
Typhoon?
Sentinel?
It puts it all into perspective a little.
A carrier is a very long term and infinitely flexible investment. When you consider the cost over 50yrs, they are awesome value for money.
Typhoon/Sentinel/E3 etc are one trick ponys.
A very nice, and possibly indispensible pony yes, but lets be honest, a hawk with sidewinder could have done the job of AD for the UK for the last 10yrs and we would still be safe and well, and the E3 is barely operational anyway.
In 2050, the carriers have every chance of being operationally effective.
Typhoon?
Sentinel?
Ah, that would be the all-weather, day/night Hawk T1A fighter. I bet my freind's 60' cruiser would have been an equally effective replacemant for the Royal Navy and my old land cruiser would have substituted nicely for a whole battalion!
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sussex
Age: 66
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In 2050, the carriers have every chance of being operationally effective.
Typhoon?
Sentinel?
Is anyone starting a sweep-stake as to whether the carrier(s) will be set up for STOVL in 2050?
Typhoon?
Sentinel?
Is anyone starting a sweep-stake as to whether the carrier(s) will be set up for STOVL in 2050?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Courtney
Just remind me how many aircraft have tried to attack the uk since WW2 in daylight let alone in bad weather at night?
And please don't give me the "thats because we have Tornado/typhoon" crap.
By that argument people who wear tinfoil helmets to keep out the mindwaves have been sucessfull too.
There has been no credible AD threat for a very long time against mainland UK.
Carriers, however, are always useful from war to sabre rattling to humanitarian.
Just remind me how many aircraft have tried to attack the uk since WW2 in daylight let alone in bad weather at night?
And please don't give me the "thats because we have Tornado/typhoon" crap.
By that argument people who wear tinfoil helmets to keep out the mindwaves have been sucessfull too.
There has been no credible AD threat for a very long time against mainland UK.
Carriers, however, are always useful from war to sabre rattling to humanitarian.
I shall inform CAS that you have assessed that it's OK to stand down QRA. You may need to explain why you din't tell us 60 years ago.
Anti-air, AD, DCA, etc doesn't just happen at home, by the way. In fact, let's take all the air-to-air kit out of F-35B and make back into a new GR9.
Anti-air, AD, DCA, etc doesn't just happen at home, by the way. In fact, let's take all the air-to-air kit out of F-35B and make back into a new GR9.
Last edited by Courtney Mil; 19th Jun 2012 at 18:20.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Anti-air, AD, DCA, etc doesn't just happen at home, by the way."
Yes, the Royal Navy is well aware of that,though I would go as far as to say it happens just about everywhere but.
That's why we need carriers to take it with us.
Yes, the Royal Navy is well aware of that,though I would go as far as to say it happens just about everywhere but.
That's why we need carriers to take it with us.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lockheed Martin Offers Bolt-on Multi-Mission Sensor System | Aviation International News
I thought this was the only game in town, and if it shares the same radar as the F35 surely that will allow simpler fusion and networking?
It will use stock HM2s including their current workstations apparently.
I thought this was the only game in town, and if it shares the same radar as the F35 surely that will allow simpler fusion and networking?
It will use stock HM2s including their current workstations apparently.
Last edited by hulahoop7; 19th Jun 2012 at 18:32.