No cats and flaps ...... back to F35B?
slightly tangental, but meh - if we've going back to STOV/L, is there not a significant rationale for retaining HMS Illustrious until the two CVF's enter service - Ocean and Lusty providing what will now be relevent deck handling/air operations experience as well as the 'strike' capability with AH-64?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Surrey, UK
Age: 70
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Money saved!
Thank god we have finally seen sense and have gone back to where we should be; by reverting to the B we've saved at least £100k on buying a new model of the QE for the 5th floor of MB. 
I have no proper knowledge of FW operating from carriers even though I flew off them in helos for years. Which is why I ask this question to those who are more in the know regarding FW assets and capabilities.
We are a 2nd division military contributor to the West (SDSR saw to that). We could sink even lower if circumstances get worse in the next 5-10yrs.
Why are we 'trying' to keep up with the Jones's w.r.t. the best/newest FW in the world? When will we ever learn to project our own needs rather than cow tow to the coat tails of others.
When (if ever) will we really need the cutting edge technology of Typhoon for example? Why then are we even going down the road of F35's...what is the point? When if ever will these beasts be needed to exercise their superiority as modern day fighters/bombers?
What is wrong with continuing to build the best carrier platform in the world (because of fwd projection needs) but instead of the F35 (et al)...why not buy a plethora of F18's or Rafale even?? I bet you could get 2 or even 3 F18's for every F35. Tested, tried and proven...probably capable of coping with the needs of the Uk for atleast the next 20yrs. Why do we always insist on cutting edge unproven technology?
BAe have said the revised launch process will cost billions.....we all know why that is don't we? Have you known any government tell a prime contractor where to go at this stage in the process? I suppose their mitigation is that it will safeguard jobs.
Let's all learn from the Canadians here: They are struggling with Merlin's 6 years after ordering them and still not front line. They are struggling with S92's, years later and they now find they are struggling with the F35 procurement process.
NEVER, EVER, BUY NEW...is my motto (even if you can afford it).
We are a 2nd division military contributor to the West (SDSR saw to that). We could sink even lower if circumstances get worse in the next 5-10yrs.
Why are we 'trying' to keep up with the Jones's w.r.t. the best/newest FW in the world? When will we ever learn to project our own needs rather than cow tow to the coat tails of others.
When (if ever) will we really need the cutting edge technology of Typhoon for example? Why then are we even going down the road of F35's...what is the point? When if ever will these beasts be needed to exercise their superiority as modern day fighters/bombers?
What is wrong with continuing to build the best carrier platform in the world (because of fwd projection needs) but instead of the F35 (et al)...why not buy a plethora of F18's or Rafale even?? I bet you could get 2 or even 3 F18's for every F35. Tested, tried and proven...probably capable of coping with the needs of the Uk for atleast the next 20yrs. Why do we always insist on cutting edge unproven technology?
BAe have said the revised launch process will cost billions.....we all know why that is don't we? Have you known any government tell a prime contractor where to go at this stage in the process? I suppose their mitigation is that it will safeguard jobs.
Let's all learn from the Canadians here: They are struggling with Merlin's 6 years after ordering them and still not front line. They are struggling with S92's, years later and they now find they are struggling with the F35 procurement process.
NEVER, EVER, BUY NEW...is my motto (even if you can afford it).
NaB, sorry, i wasn't clear - i meant using the embarked helicopters as the aircraft handling practice. with the end of A'stan in 2014, there'll be lots more helicopters to go around - as well as the move of Merlin HC into the CHF. i can't see any future government being too keen of involving themselves in long term, large-scale ground operations in countries they can't spell...
uppity wog-bashing from beyond the horizon, yes - 4 Mech Bde to Somalia, no.
uppity wog-bashing from beyond the horizon, yes - 4 Mech Bde to Somalia, no.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NaB,
If there's one thing the RN have got a lot of recent experience on in the last few years it's operating varying types of air groups and aircraft mixes.
I absolutely agree that mixing FW and RW ops from a deck can be a real pain - I freely admit to throwing a hissy fit or two (or three) on Invincible when my beloved Sea Kings were elbowed off the deck by the shiny SHARs one they'd had their night's sleep. I was young, excitable and not wise. Not much of an excuse, but it's all I've got.
But you know what? We managed to get 11 Sea Kings, 9 SHARS and a Lynx working off that small deck, as well as countless other visitors, in absolutely awful weather conditions.
CVF has a deck about the size of 'Forrestal'. It's not going to move about as much as CVS. I have faith that, given the right command and control arrangements, the RN can deliver a really important flexible maritime aviation capability for the country. If that means re-inventing deck ops, heck, we've done that a few times over the years. (Angled deck. Steam catapult. Ski Jump). Not easy, not straightforward, but if you know what you're doing, doable.
The RN and the FAA know what they're doing. They'll do it.
Best Regards to all those who now know what they're going to do. What an opportunity. I envy them.
Engines
If there's one thing the RN have got a lot of recent experience on in the last few years it's operating varying types of air groups and aircraft mixes.
I absolutely agree that mixing FW and RW ops from a deck can be a real pain - I freely admit to throwing a hissy fit or two (or three) on Invincible when my beloved Sea Kings were elbowed off the deck by the shiny SHARs one they'd had their night's sleep. I was young, excitable and not wise. Not much of an excuse, but it's all I've got.
But you know what? We managed to get 11 Sea Kings, 9 SHARS and a Lynx working off that small deck, as well as countless other visitors, in absolutely awful weather conditions.
CVF has a deck about the size of 'Forrestal'. It's not going to move about as much as CVS. I have faith that, given the right command and control arrangements, the RN can deliver a really important flexible maritime aviation capability for the country. If that means re-inventing deck ops, heck, we've done that a few times over the years. (Angled deck. Steam catapult. Ski Jump). Not easy, not straightforward, but if you know what you're doing, doable.
The RN and the FAA know what they're doing. They'll do it.
Best Regards to all those who now know what they're going to do. What an opportunity. I envy them.
Engines
Hmm! Confused!
Perhaps my thoughts can be best expressed by quoting this post of mine from the Future Carrier thread:
I wonder if the cost issue is the only one, or if training and skills (and current capabilities this decade) come into it? Issues which, of course, were discussed at length both on PPRuNe and elsewhere...
cokecan
You mean keep Lusty on in the LPH role - perhaps as Ocean is (reportedly) in a piss poor state?
Perhaps my thoughts can be best expressed by quoting this post of mine from the Future Carrier thread:
GK121
Interesting. Surely if the build was slowed for political reasons, then it can be speeded back up?
Also I understand that there is nothing to stop Illustrious being retained post 2014 (until QE comes along). Even in a LPH role, having more than one flat top gives a margin of safety in case of accidents or other unexpected things (Lusty recently sustained some damage on exercise). Things do crop up - like this possible deployment to Somalia.
Mach Two
Perhaps this would be better discussed on the "No cats and flaps ...... back to F35B" thread?
I have noticed that. But other countries do, and their jets could be embarked. There was also talk at one time of an RN Hornet squadron - why not an RN AV8B squadron?
What about the guys flying the F/A18? The UK has never operated that, and I think the idea for RN guys to fly them was to build CTOL experience. If the future is not CTOL, but V/STOL, then perhaps training on AV8B will be more suitable for a future transition of F35B? An RN AV8B squadron has other attractions too (such as giving us back a task force capability this decade). The politicians (the PM mostly) looked into the crystal ball with closed eyes, and saw nothing unexpected this decade.
The Americans want to UK to have a decent carrier capability - seeing us as a very important ally.
Hmm! I am not sure the Officers quoted here would agree:
The lack of adequately training personnel could delay the carrier coming into service by another three or four years, the Navy commander has said.
Another officer has told The Telegraph that the loss of carrier deck handling skills could prove "disastrous" with fatal accidents caused by inexperienced ratings.
Or indeed the First Sea Lord: Loss of Carrier Strike Capability Top Concern of Royal Navy Chief
F35B or F35C, we still have to get there. Current policy does not answer several key questions?
How will we maintain and develop carrier related skills this decade?
What will we do if we need to provide a task group with air defence beyond the range of ship based sensors and weapons, or if ROE demand positive ID before things can be engaged?
How will we make up for the shortfall in maritime force projection, given that SSN numbers will decline this decade, so there will be less TLAM shooters, and Apache is limited in sped, range, and payload, and available only in limited numbers?
Interesting. Surely if the build was slowed for political reasons, then it can be speeded back up?
Also I understand that there is nothing to stop Illustrious being retained post 2014 (until QE comes along). Even in a LPH role, having more than one flat top gives a margin of safety in case of accidents or other unexpected things (Lusty recently sustained some damage on exercise). Things do crop up - like this possible deployment to Somalia.
Mach Two
Perhaps this would be better discussed on the "No cats and flaps ...... back to F35B" thread?
We don't have any to embark. The UK doesn't operate Harriers.
If F35B is chosen, the RN and RAF pilots need to be worked up on that, not a type we no longer have.
The Americans want to UK to have a decent carrier capability - seeing us as a very important ally.
Carrier crews will need to be worked-up once the new carrier is being introduced to service. Quite a way to go yet.
The lack of adequately training personnel could delay the carrier coming into service by another three or four years, the Navy commander has said.
Another officer has told The Telegraph that the loss of carrier deck handling skills could prove "disastrous" with fatal accidents caused by inexperienced ratings.
Or indeed the First Sea Lord: Loss of Carrier Strike Capability Top Concern of Royal Navy Chief
F35B or F35C, we still have to get there. Current policy does not answer several key questions?
How will we maintain and develop carrier related skills this decade?
What will we do if we need to provide a task group with air defence beyond the range of ship based sensors and weapons, or if ROE demand positive ID before things can be engaged?
How will we make up for the shortfall in maritime force projection, given that SSN numbers will decline this decade, so there will be less TLAM shooters, and Apache is limited in sped, range, and payload, and available only in limited numbers?
cokecan
You mean keep Lusty on in the LPH role - perhaps as Ocean is (reportedly) in a piss poor state?
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 10th May 2012 at 19:26.
Engines - we're in agreement. My point was that Hammond (or rather his briefers) suggesting that operating helos together with f/w was somehow easier with STOVL compared to CTOL on a deck of QEC size was stretching the actualite - not that the RN (and the Crabs if they're aboard) couldn't do it. I think the record on a CVS was 22 cabs, including 10 SHAR which must have been "fun"......
As you say, let them get on with it - please God with no more interference.
Cokecan/WEBF - the decision on Ocean vs Lusty has been made and I doubt it'll be reversed. Irrespective of the material state of Ocean a complement of sub-300 vs one of 600+ has a logic all its own.
As you say, let them get on with it - please God with no more interference.
Cokecan/WEBF - the decision on Ocean vs Lusty has been made and I doubt it'll be reversed. Irrespective of the material state of Ocean a complement of sub-300 vs one of 600+ has a logic all its own.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only reason we are having this discussion is one thing - we cannot afford it! Sadly, the politicians have never grasped the fact that we are no longer the leader of an empire.
If you really want to have power projection, then go look at the US and see what is required.
These carriers should never have been ordered - it takes money away from capabilities we really need - such as MPA!
I am fed up with the political excuses - this is all about saving pennies when pounds are really needed.
If you really want to have power projection, then go look at the US and see what is required.
These carriers should never have been ordered - it takes money away from capabilities we really need - such as MPA!
I am fed up with the political excuses - this is all about saving pennies when pounds are really needed.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NaB,
The record, as far as I can remember was a particular night down south, when we got to 9 SHAR, 13 SK (11 of our own plus 2 visitors), a Lynx and a Wessex 5. Still had Sea Dart, so no graveyard worth talking about, and verrry dodgy lifts.
The key was brilliant leadership from the ship (Captain and Wings were outstanding), squadrons all getting on (including Sharkey) and a great ships' company supporting the action. Experienced FDO and really good ACR officers. Toss that mix into the blender and you can do just about anything.
Grindingly hard work and huge fun interspersed with occasional sheer terror. Carrier ops the RN way. Can't beat it.
Best regards
Engines
The record, as far as I can remember was a particular night down south, when we got to 9 SHAR, 13 SK (11 of our own plus 2 visitors), a Lynx and a Wessex 5. Still had Sea Dart, so no graveyard worth talking about, and verrry dodgy lifts.
The key was brilliant leadership from the ship (Captain and Wings were outstanding), squadrons all getting on (including Sharkey) and a great ships' company supporting the action. Experienced FDO and really good ACR officers. Toss that mix into the blender and you can do just about anything.
Grindingly hard work and huge fun interspersed with occasional sheer terror. Carrier ops the RN way. Can't beat it.
Best regards
Engines
Ghostnav,
its not a matter of 'affording it' - we're a £Trillion economy who'se government spends about £500billion a year.
the idea that we 'can not afford' £2bn for C&T and F-35C is mathmatically impossible. we choose not to spend £2bn for C&T and F-35C, and £whatever for LRMPA, and SSN's, and another 20 escorts.
'can't' doesn't come into it.
its not a matter of 'affording it' - we're a £Trillion economy who'se government spends about £500billion a year.
the idea that we 'can not afford' £2bn for C&T and F-35C is mathmatically impossible. we choose not to spend £2bn for C&T and F-35C, and £whatever for LRMPA, and SSN's, and another 20 escorts.
'can't' doesn't come into it.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Hammond says, according to the BBC "This announcement means that we remain on course to deliver carrier strike in 2020 as a key part of our Future Force 2020" Bearing mind that the Nimrods scrapped in January 2011 were due in service in 2003, I am not filled with confidence by this announcement.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Waiting to return to the Loire.
Age: 54
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I have said before on this thread, I don't think that this is the worst decision ever - but there will have to be a better way of doing things than was done with JFH.
As said above, the CVFs could be the most flexible flat-tops on the seas, with more bang than a Gator and more amphibiosity (
) than a CVN. As well as the F-35 and grey Merlins, there could always be a CHF flight and some Booties on board as a mini-MEU.
Just a pity we haven't got options on Osprey, CH53 or embarked marinised Chinooks (I am a dreamer...)
On the global scale, POTUS can now say that the B is not just a vanity project for the USMC, as the only Tier 1 partner in the project is going this way.
Ironically, the B could also be used off the CVNs, so this might make the C model the white elephant now as it is the least flexible option - however, the Navy does have catapults and arrestor gear in abundance already...but do they really want the C?
As said above, the CVFs could be the most flexible flat-tops on the seas, with more bang than a Gator and more amphibiosity (
) than a CVN. As well as the F-35 and grey Merlins, there could always be a CHF flight and some Booties on board as a mini-MEU.Just a pity we haven't got options on Osprey, CH53 or embarked marinised Chinooks (I am a dreamer...)
On the global scale, POTUS can now say that the B is not just a vanity project for the USMC, as the only Tier 1 partner in the project is going this way.
Ironically, the B could also be used off the CVNs, so this might make the C model the white elephant now as it is the least flexible option - however, the Navy does have catapults and arrestor gear in abundance already...but do they really want the C?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it just me...
If you were making two big ships and already had contracts in place, and were asked to make modifications to one of them that no-one on your team could really be called qualified for - could you really be bothered? I think it quite convenient that ACA pushed the government beyond their price limit.
When are we re-opening the 'road to VSTOL carrier and jets not including VSTOL carrier and jets' logic?
I am sure it would only take a few FOI questions to uncover how much we saved by binning Harrier and CVS. How much we spent on changing QECV to CV and back again. How much we paid RN stovies and maintainers of both cloths to leave. How many slots we now require from USMC and how much we'll pay. I wonder how much we'll actually end up saving and how the 'one type has to go' line may not have been the whole truth.
I feel incredibly sorry for all the guys who've actually put thousands of man hours into this debate, all to be exactly where we were in October 2010...other than then we had a carrier and a VSTOL aeroplane.
If you were making two big ships and already had contracts in place, and were asked to make modifications to one of them that no-one on your team could really be called qualified for - could you really be bothered? I think it quite convenient that ACA pushed the government beyond their price limit.
When are we re-opening the 'road to VSTOL carrier and jets not including VSTOL carrier and jets' logic?
I am sure it would only take a few FOI questions to uncover how much we saved by binning Harrier and CVS. How much we spent on changing QECV to CV and back again. How much we paid RN stovies and maintainers of both cloths to leave. How many slots we now require from USMC and how much we'll pay. I wonder how much we'll actually end up saving and how the 'one type has to go' line may not have been the whole truth.
I feel incredibly sorry for all the guys who've actually put thousands of man hours into this debate, all to be exactly where we were in October 2010...other than then we had a carrier and a VSTOL aeroplane.
Thread Starter
British U-turn on US jets damages credibility of UK defence chiefs | News | guardian.co.uk
'Cats and Flaps' Norton-Taylor again - says we're buying only '12' jsf at '£60m' each now - surely these numbers aren't right?
Surely that's (at least?) 12 deployed on a carrier CSG, not total buy!
How many are we actually buying?
The fundamental suggestion about a credibility issue for the SDSR decision making is valid however - as an outsider it feels more like the politicians fault for pushing the switch, but then again did the defence board(?) actually make any warnings against the SDSR 'go for C' option? Was going for a single carrier with cats really what the top mil brass wanted, or were they 'told' to make cats the answer no matter what?
'Cats and Flaps' Norton-Taylor again - says we're buying only '12' jsf at '£60m' each now - surely these numbers aren't right?
Surely that's (at least?) 12 deployed on a carrier CSG, not total buy!
How many are we actually buying?
The fundamental suggestion about a credibility issue for the SDSR decision making is valid however - as an outsider it feels more like the politicians fault for pushing the switch, but then again did the defence board(?) actually make any warnings against the SDSR 'go for C' option? Was going for a single carrier with cats really what the top mil brass wanted, or were they 'told' to make cats the answer no matter what?
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: .
Posts: 2,173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
worth listening to Lewis Page on Radio 4 on thursday morning
BBC iPlayer - Today: 10/05/2012
Starts at 2hr 45min
BBC iPlayer - Today: 10/05/2012
Starts at 2hr 45min
Could delay be the problem?
I know nothing about any of this but it did strike me that if it is going to take extra time to get catapults fitted then possibly one of the extra expenses might be the cost of keeping a lot of people employed in shipyards while waiting for the final bit of work to materialise. I don't have anything to back this up - it's just speculation.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Smallville
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CDS Article in Telegraph re decision