UK MoD gives £30Bn discount to USMC
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Biggus,
Your post #2 is quite right. We spend money on planned incremental upgrades not knowing a fleet is to be scrapped and then it is (scrapped).
Bummer.
Do you think there might be more of an issue in knowing that the fleet that isn't going to be scrapped needs to have over a billion spent on it but not mentioning it until after the SDSR?
That may have played some part in how the final decision was made.
Your post #2 is quite right. We spend money on planned incremental upgrades not knowing a fleet is to be scrapped and then it is (scrapped).
Bummer.
Do you think there might be more of an issue in knowing that the fleet that isn't going to be scrapped needs to have over a billion spent on it but not mentioning it until after the SDSR?
That may have played some part in how the final decision was made.
Originally Posted by Not a Boffin
The Indians would need a fleet air defender, which GR7/GR9 ain't. Upgrading the aircraft with the APG65 radar (which is what the USMC, Spanish and Italian aircraft have) for about another 6 years of Hermes would be a very expensive way of doing things.
Kind of makes me wonder which Har we should be talking about when people say 'scrapping the Harrier was bonkers'
The Indians have an Israeli upgrade to their SHAR 1s, with new radar, Derby missiles and new grey paint thrown in for free.
http://livefist.********.com/2010/02...rier-lush.html
http://livefist.********.com/2010/02...rier-lush.html
Courtney
The APG65 was if the Indians had been offered the GR7/9 frames.
The BV was a cracking radar and with AIM120 a superlative weapon system, which is one reason why we didn't sell our SHARs to the Indians.
Did we gash the wrong a/c back in 05? Impossible to say. Keeping SHAR would have kept 800/801 away from Herrick, so potentially an asset that "wasn't contributing". That said, it would have avoided the farce that JFH became in terms of FE@R and maintained the role of real carrier-based f/w.
However, to keep SHAR, their Lordships would have had to make the case and funding for Maritime air (not just the "Carrier Strike" drop bombs bit) more strongly, which frankly they haven't shown aptitude for. Remember just how tightly the Great Financial Genius held onto the purse strings, with promises made and never funded.
A debate that's done and dusted, with no objective "right" answer I suspect.
The APG65 was if the Indians had been offered the GR7/9 frames.
The BV was a cracking radar and with AIM120 a superlative weapon system, which is one reason why we didn't sell our SHARs to the Indians.
Did we gash the wrong a/c back in 05? Impossible to say. Keeping SHAR would have kept 800/801 away from Herrick, so potentially an asset that "wasn't contributing". That said, it would have avoided the farce that JFH became in terms of FE@R and maintained the role of real carrier-based f/w.
However, to keep SHAR, their Lordships would have had to make the case and funding for Maritime air (not just the "Carrier Strike" drop bombs bit) more strongly, which frankly they haven't shown aptitude for. Remember just how tightly the Great Financial Genius held onto the purse strings, with promises made and never funded.
A debate that's done and dusted, with no objective "right" answer I suspect.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pr00ne,
Hardly...... The spams must have untold numbers of surplus C130 and Chinooks in their 'grave yards'.
£112m cash is nothing and most likely already wasted in their magic black hole. A swap deal for aircraft they don't want for aircraft they do seems a logical answer to me, but I realise that logic is in short supply where the MoD and government are concerned. I'm sure US spec equipment makes no difference in the real world, especially whilst there's a shooting war going on against stone age flip flop wearing peasant farmers.
Apologies for any typing errors, using a phone ;-)
Hardly...... The spams must have untold numbers of surplus C130 and Chinooks in their 'grave yards'.
£112m cash is nothing and most likely already wasted in their magic black hole. A swap deal for aircraft they don't want for aircraft they do seems a logical answer to me, but I realise that logic is in short supply where the MoD and government are concerned. I'm sure US spec equipment makes no difference in the real world, especially whilst there's a shooting war going on against stone age flip flop wearing peasant farmers.
Apologies for any typing errors, using a phone ;-)
Indians had a lesser variant of SHAR FRS1's Blue Fox.
To avoid techy/Sec terms, their version lacked the 1st CDS package and the Mid Life Upgrade. (Like many equipments, development of BF had been shut down about a year early due to Falklands. Design features were lacking and were completed later, hence CDS phase. Sea King ASW was the same, but was not entirely completed as monies/effort were diverted to AEW.) Even when replaced with BV, BF was classified to such a degree and still so advanced that it could not be sold, so was scrapped (Not a Boffin's confirmation BV was not sold to India was a logical extension of that original policy). Superb kit.
To avoid techy/Sec terms, their version lacked the 1st CDS package and the Mid Life Upgrade. (Like many equipments, development of BF had been shut down about a year early due to Falklands. Design features were lacking and were completed later, hence CDS phase. Sea King ASW was the same, but was not entirely completed as monies/effort were diverted to AEW.) Even when replaced with BV, BF was classified to such a degree and still so advanced that it could not be sold, so was scrapped (Not a Boffin's confirmation BV was not sold to India was a logical extension of that original policy). Superb kit.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not_a_boffin...
Fitting the APG-65 to GR7/9s would require fabrication of at least a new front fuselage... every one of the USMC conversions got a complete new fuselage!
Not very feasible... which is why there was no interest on the part of India.
Now the USMC has about 1/3 of its AV-8B fleet without the APG-65... so they could fairly well replace those with GR7/9s.
However, apparently what they are planning is to transition some F/A-18A/C squadrons to the GR7/9s.
The remaining airframes would be disassembled for components, etc.
Here is what was done in the upgrade:
Fitting the APG-65 to GR7/9s would require fabrication of at least a new front fuselage... every one of the USMC conversions got a complete new fuselage!
Not very feasible... which is why there was no interest on the part of India.
Now the USMC has about 1/3 of its AV-8B fleet without the APG-65... so they could fairly well replace those with GR7/9s.
However, apparently what they are planning is to transition some F/A-18A/C squadrons to the GR7/9s.
The remaining airframes would be disassembled for components, etc.
Here is what was done in the upgrade:
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
A swap deal for aircraft they don't want for aircraft they do seems a logical answer to me
GK
Thanks for that. Hadn't appreciated it was such an extensive rebuild - definitely makes sale to another party even less attractive.
Interesting variation on the original story (ie actually using the cabs as opposed to recycling them for spares). I know a lot of the FA18s are sh@gged, hours-wise but assume the same applies to the AV8B. I wonder why they're converting VMFA as well as VMA? Maintain/strengthen the case for F35B perhaps?
Thanks for that. Hadn't appreciated it was such an extensive rebuild - definitely makes sale to another party even less attractive.
Interesting variation on the original story (ie actually using the cabs as opposed to recycling them for spares). I know a lot of the FA18s are sh@gged, hours-wise but assume the same applies to the AV8B. I wonder why they're converting VMFA as well as VMA? Maintain/strengthen the case for F35B perhaps?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: oxford
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you think there might be more of an issue in knowing that the fleet that isn't going to be scrapped needs to have over a billion spent on it but not mentioning it until after the SDSR?
That may have played some part in how the final decision was made.
That may have played some part in how the final decision was made.
Gosh. Wonder if Mr. C was a bit grumpy when he found out.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lj
Rumour has it that the PM wasn't expecting to have the 'savings' from canning the Harrier to be instantly subsumed into a GR4 hole that wasn't there during SDSR (as opposed to the wider Defence black hole that was).
FB11
Rumour has it that the PM wasn't expecting to have the 'savings' from canning the Harrier to be instantly subsumed into a GR4 hole that wasn't there during SDSR (as opposed to the wider Defence black hole that was).
FB11
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, a moment of clarity.
SDSR came up with Harrier, CVS and DPOC as savings set against the cost keeping the Tornado (getting rid of it would have saved £600 million more over ten years) and variant change to F-35C.
18 months on it turns out (caveat - this is a rumour site) that the Tornado ate the £1 billion saved from DPOC (its successor - oh the irony - can't afford to buy the new aeroplane we spent all the money on the old one), which was actually needed for QECV conversion. Hence the motivation for F-35B variant re-selection. Yes, makes perfect sense!
That and its easier to land, you don't need pilots and deck crews to be out in the USA, it's similar to a helo so RN helo types can supervise it....so RN types don't need F-35B cockpits...all so clear now.
SDSR came up with Harrier, CVS and DPOC as savings set against the cost keeping the Tornado (getting rid of it would have saved £600 million more over ten years) and variant change to F-35C.
18 months on it turns out (caveat - this is a rumour site) that the Tornado ate the £1 billion saved from DPOC (its successor - oh the irony - can't afford to buy the new aeroplane we spent all the money on the old one), which was actually needed for QECV conversion. Hence the motivation for F-35B variant re-selection. Yes, makes perfect sense!
That and its easier to land, you don't need pilots and deck crews to be out in the USA, it's similar to a helo so RN helo types can supervise it....so RN types don't need F-35B cockpits...all so clear now.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: the earth
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now, now orca. You sound far too sceptical for my likeing.
Next you'll be telling us that the supposed 'savings' from F35B will all be taken up in a re-design of the carrier (again) and additional mods to the b to refit the uk wpns that were taken out when we switched to C.
Never happen. Nope. No way.
Next you'll be telling us that the supposed 'savings' from F35B will all be taken up in a re-design of the carrier (again) and additional mods to the b to refit the uk wpns that were taken out when we switched to C.
Never happen. Nope. No way.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question to those that might be still carrier current
If several aircraft have taken off from the deck of a carrier, have you ever heard of them not being able to land back on deck because of bad weather and then had to ditch in the sea? We hear all these comments about bad weather restricting flying and those that make them try to pretend it only effects aircraft carriers and a concrete airfield is immune from the effects of mother nature.
I served on what was the smallest aircraft carrier we operated and I think it fair to say it was far more prone to uppy, downy movement than your much bigger carriers so yes there were days when flying was cancelled, but we NEVER, ever lost several aircraft that had flown off to carry out a mission and could not be recovered. If we knew the weather was too bad for flying and a hundred miles to the West was more suitable then that is where we would move to.
The carrier has mobility and can move away from local storms, plus the enemy be they shore based aircraft or sea based will also have the same problems and have to cope with these unfavourable conditions. The STOVL aircraft may well be able to operate in rougher sea conditions but let us not forget the calmest place on any big ship is the stern where on our carrier we locate the arrester gear (not because its the calmest location). Landing an aircraft on the deck of a carrier has never been a walk in the park, landing in rough weather is what sorts the men from the boys, landing in rough weather at night is what makes these pilots men of EXCEPTIONAL ability. Hopefully the F-35C will have aids that might make that task slightly easier but I just know it will never be a walk in the park!.
I still need convincing that the 'B' is a superior aircraft to the 'C' and as much as I would love to see the F-18 being seen as a consideration, it still must surely come back to ownership and would the RAF welcome the F-18 with open arms. Let's keep our fingers crossed that the F-35C is overcoming all its problems and all this talk about the 'B' is just media hype? a
Apologies for all my witterings
John
If several aircraft have taken off from the deck of a carrier, have you ever heard of them not being able to land back on deck because of bad weather and then had to ditch in the sea? We hear all these comments about bad weather restricting flying and those that make them try to pretend it only effects aircraft carriers and a concrete airfield is immune from the effects of mother nature.
I served on what was the smallest aircraft carrier we operated and I think it fair to say it was far more prone to uppy, downy movement than your much bigger carriers so yes there were days when flying was cancelled, but we NEVER, ever lost several aircraft that had flown off to carry out a mission and could not be recovered. If we knew the weather was too bad for flying and a hundred miles to the West was more suitable then that is where we would move to.
The carrier has mobility and can move away from local storms, plus the enemy be they shore based aircraft or sea based will also have the same problems and have to cope with these unfavourable conditions. The STOVL aircraft may well be able to operate in rougher sea conditions but let us not forget the calmest place on any big ship is the stern where on our carrier we locate the arrester gear (not because its the calmest location). Landing an aircraft on the deck of a carrier has never been a walk in the park, landing in rough weather is what sorts the men from the boys, landing in rough weather at night is what makes these pilots men of EXCEPTIONAL ability. Hopefully the F-35C will have aids that might make that task slightly easier but I just know it will never be a walk in the park!.
I still need convincing that the 'B' is a superior aircraft to the 'C' and as much as I would love to see the F-18 being seen as a consideration, it still must surely come back to ownership and would the RAF welcome the F-18 with open arms. Let's keep our fingers crossed that the F-35C is overcoming all its problems and all this talk about the 'B' is just media hype? a
Apologies for all my witterings
John
Join Date: May 2010
Location: the earth
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glojo,
I dont know of many 'mass ditchings' but if you want to do blue water, non-div ops then organic aar is how you mitgate that risk. One ac is asigned as the recovery tanker and ac that 'bolter' are topped up whilst in the 'bolter patten'.
Very good example from the USN here.
I dont know of many 'mass ditchings' but if you want to do blue water, non-div ops then organic aar is how you mitgate that risk. One ac is asigned as the recovery tanker and ac that 'bolter' are topped up whilst in the 'bolter patten'.
Very good example from the USN here.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Organic AR has three broad uses. Pre-mission tanking, post mission tanking as described above and a 'chase down' role where by the tanker will attempt to run down a fighter that is off to the beach.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Autobit please do not get me wrong, I deliberately used the words I did as we sometimes unfortunately lost the odd aircraft due to the very nature of the beast but during my time at sea I cannot recall the type of incident I have outlined.
To me the carrier is the ultimate weapon if a nation wants to 'project power' and being able to launch and more important..... recover aircraft during 'inclement' weather is a must have skill that has to be taught and then maintained. It is no good only operating in ideal conditions as one day that will catch you out. I note that ship had been operational for five months and sadly some of those pilots appeared to lack a certain degree of confidence... As the saying goes... It is not about the size of the man in the fight, it is all about the size of the fight in the man.
Nice video but what a huge ship... Centaur was one fifth the size and I guess we could all shoot the breeze regarding sea stories
I think I saw the documentary that your video relates to and the night landings proved to be 'interesting'. Eventually did the boss go up in a tanker to give out that much needed to fuel as a number of pilots struggled to get back onto the deck? That was also his very last flight and thankfully he got back at the first attempt and caught the third wire?
Night landings on a carrier at sea in rough weather must surely be one of the ultimate skills required of a Navy pilot? RESPECT and now do it on a tiny little Centaur class carrier... We sailed close to the Enterprise and we felt like one of her liberty boats!!
Can Great Britain afford to operate a fixed wing carrier? I have no idea but if we want to play the game then we should play in a professional manner with the right ball and the correct kit.
To me the carrier is the ultimate weapon if a nation wants to 'project power' and being able to launch and more important..... recover aircraft during 'inclement' weather is a must have skill that has to be taught and then maintained. It is no good only operating in ideal conditions as one day that will catch you out. I note that ship had been operational for five months and sadly some of those pilots appeared to lack a certain degree of confidence... As the saying goes... It is not about the size of the man in the fight, it is all about the size of the fight in the man.
Nice video but what a huge ship... Centaur was one fifth the size and I guess we could all shoot the breeze regarding sea stories
I think I saw the documentary that your video relates to and the night landings proved to be 'interesting'. Eventually did the boss go up in a tanker to give out that much needed to fuel as a number of pilots struggled to get back onto the deck? That was also his very last flight and thankfully he got back at the first attempt and caught the third wire?
Night landings on a carrier at sea in rough weather must surely be one of the ultimate skills required of a Navy pilot? RESPECT and now do it on a tiny little Centaur class carrier... We sailed close to the Enterprise and we felt like one of her liberty boats!!
Can Great Britain afford to operate a fixed wing carrier? I have no idea but if we want to play the game then we should play in a professional manner with the right ball and the correct kit.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any money made from disposal goes back to the Treasury, it's not given to the MOD. Why would the Treasury be interested in second hand aircraft?
If various government departments are unable to join the dots, it's no wonder the country is skint and much mil kit is decrepit and unfit for purpose.