Reality v 'Contingency'
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AW,
Apologies, I was attempting to be flippant, and all of the passionate Carrier and F-35 threads and posts are well out of my comfort zone, experience and at times interest. I personally see lots within the light blue singing the praises of Typhoon, but very few that look forward to or are enthusiastic about Lightening II.
I was merely trying to highlight that irrespective of our individual passion and the bat and balling of arguments for and against certain options on this web site, that if the politicians really did want a threat led, long term SDSR then any sacred cows, red lines or subjects which (because of our individual Service background) just don't seem right, then we should embrace open and transparent discussions.
Without sounding too altruistic, short term pain (to us on the shop floor) for long term gain (for the nation)?
Apologies, I was attempting to be flippant, and all of the passionate Carrier and F-35 threads and posts are well out of my comfort zone, experience and at times interest. I personally see lots within the light blue singing the praises of Typhoon, but very few that look forward to or are enthusiastic about Lightening II.
I was merely trying to highlight that irrespective of our individual passion and the bat and balling of arguments for and against certain options on this web site, that if the politicians really did want a threat led, long term SDSR then any sacred cows, red lines or subjects which (because of our individual Service background) just don't seem right, then we should embrace open and transparent discussions.
Without sounding too altruistic, short term pain (to us on the shop floor) for long term gain (for the nation)?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
short term pain (to us on the shop floor) for long term gain (for the nation)?
Harold Wilson said a week is a long time in politics, how far ahead will a Defence Review really matter to the winners of the next general election?
And please will people recognise that F35 will be majority manned by the light blue; the Navy are an add on.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: S of 55N
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F35
This thread certainly didn't go as I expected. First it veered off onto the Scottish independence debate and currently it's exploring the issues around F35. I'd hoped it might follow the OP around how hard it is to do meaningful contingency planning. Heh-ho, I guess that's what happens with online fora.
WRT F35, it's worth being aware that at the highest level of cap planning it's just one component in a programme called Future Combat Air System (FCAS). Currently, there are a number of options in FCAS, all of which include F35, with an associated mix of extended, upgraded Typhoon and contender future aircraft, including several possible UCAS variants.
Nothing, and I mean nothing, has been decided in terms of the future shape and size of FCAS beyond 2030, including the RN/RAF/variant mix - but it is being discussed and planned for at length and in depth by some very serious people. Yes, Defence does try to plan out that far (and beyond) and spends real, significant money doing so.
Much debate on this forum is based on the papers, the telly and what's heard in the crewroom - and that's right and proper (and more than half the point - and definitely the major attraction). However, associated assertions should be made with a due sense of self awareness.
Yours in Defence capability planning,
Sun.
WRT F35, it's worth being aware that at the highest level of cap planning it's just one component in a programme called Future Combat Air System (FCAS). Currently, there are a number of options in FCAS, all of which include F35, with an associated mix of extended, upgraded Typhoon and contender future aircraft, including several possible UCAS variants.
Nothing, and I mean nothing, has been decided in terms of the future shape and size of FCAS beyond 2030, including the RN/RAF/variant mix - but it is being discussed and planned for at length and in depth by some very serious people. Yes, Defence does try to plan out that far (and beyond) and spends real, significant money doing so.
Much debate on this forum is based on the papers, the telly and what's heard in the crewroom - and that's right and proper (and more than half the point - and definitely the major attraction). However, associated assertions should be made with a due sense of self awareness.
Yours in Defence capability planning,
Sun.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Kitbag,
Regarding comments on who owns/operates/flys F-35....wrong thread I think my friend and will be lost in the grass here!
That is unless WEBF or another Fishead wants a bite!
SW - you beat me to it by 4 minutes!
Regarding comments on who owns/operates/flys F-35....wrong thread I think my friend and will be lost in the grass here!
That is unless WEBF or another Fishead wants a bite!
SW - you beat me to it by 4 minutes!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F35?
Hmmm......the F35;
Just for a moment, let's suppose back at the turn of the 80's, instead of Tornado, we took the risk of buying a new, unproven fighter from the Americans, based on cutting edge technology and featuring advanced fly by wire and a futuristic cockpit, coupled with impressive aerodynamic performance.....
Now picture what our airforce could have been like during the past 30+ years if we had bought the same number of F16's as we did Tornado GRs and F3s......I dare say the image of what that would have meant in terms of capability is quite an attractive thought to many on this forum.
The F35 is the F16 of today. Yes it may seem like a white elephant at present, but then so did the F16 during its own development. If anyone thinks that we can do without the F35s capabilities in the future airborne warfare environment, they are gravely mistaken. Yes, it will probably be one of the last manned platforms we ever buy, but if we are only able to afford to run a handful of combat AC, they MUST be the best, the silver bullet option is the only one we can have if we are to survive.
Clausewitz was quite correct when he stated that "quantity has a quality all of its own.." But when you have a company of men armed with SA80s going up against a platoon of concealed snipers with Barrett .50 cals...well, I know which team I'd prefer to be on.....
Just for a moment, let's suppose back at the turn of the 80's, instead of Tornado, we took the risk of buying a new, unproven fighter from the Americans, based on cutting edge technology and featuring advanced fly by wire and a futuristic cockpit, coupled with impressive aerodynamic performance.....
Now picture what our airforce could have been like during the past 30+ years if we had bought the same number of F16's as we did Tornado GRs and F3s......I dare say the image of what that would have meant in terms of capability is quite an attractive thought to many on this forum.
The F35 is the F16 of today. Yes it may seem like a white elephant at present, but then so did the F16 during its own development. If anyone thinks that we can do without the F35s capabilities in the future airborne warfare environment, they are gravely mistaken. Yes, it will probably be one of the last manned platforms we ever buy, but if we are only able to afford to run a handful of combat AC, they MUST be the best, the silver bullet option is the only one we can have if we are to survive.
Clausewitz was quite correct when he stated that "quantity has a quality all of its own.." But when you have a company of men armed with SA80s going up against a platoon of concealed snipers with Barrett .50 cals...well, I know which team I'd prefer to be on.....
Now picture what our airforce could have been like during the past 30+ years if we had bought the same number of F16's as we did Tornado GRs and F3s......I dare say the image of what that would have meant in terms of capability is quite an attractive thought to many on this forum.
Originally Posted by Stendec5
The F.35 is an obscenely expensive pile of ess-aich-one-tee (lots of good stuff on YouTube about this Turkey) Withdrawing from this cash-drain would be an excellent first step on the road to a sane Defence Policy (possible replacement could be the Gripen in which BAe have an interest).
BAe had been reducing it involvement for a number of years and all links were finally severed in June 2011 when BAe sold their remaining shareholder stake in Saab.
