Sea Jet
If it (the Sea Harrier) had enjoyed the upgrade intended for it instead of being axed, it would have JTIDS, and several other bits and bobs. Together with the SKW Mk7, and the number of frigates and destroyers that the SDR said we needed (32 - quietly reduced to 31 in 2002, soon to be 25) would have given UK maritime task groups a greater level of air defence than ever before. Now we have neither the fighter or the ships, yet an increasing number of vulnerable amphibious ships and other high value assets. I wouldn't call that progress.
To digress for a moment, I suspect the reason why Type 23s went instead of more Type 42s is because if more T42s were axed, leaving less than eight in service, the bean counters would refuse to pay for eight TYpe 45s. Don't you just love politics? As Vapour says, the T42 isn't at her best in the littoral (where future operations will tend to be - and the most dangerous place) and only has two missiles on the launcher at any one time. Against a salvo of supersonic missiles, isn't the T23 with 32 vertical launch Sea Wolf better? Ideally you would have both, together with a CAP (and more means to dael with launch platforms). Sadly this Government thinks that every war will be like the last one, and proper defence isn't needed.
As Vapour also points out, it isn't just war operations that may involve an air threat, and they need not have sophisticated weaponry. An obsolete MiG with a driver on a one way mission...
To digress for a moment, I suspect the reason why Type 23s went instead of more Type 42s is because if more T42s were axed, leaving less than eight in service, the bean counters would refuse to pay for eight TYpe 45s. Don't you just love politics? As Vapour says, the T42 isn't at her best in the littoral (where future operations will tend to be - and the most dangerous place) and only has two missiles on the launcher at any one time. Against a salvo of supersonic missiles, isn't the T23 with 32 vertical launch Sea Wolf better? Ideally you would have both, together with a CAP (and more means to dael with launch platforms). Sadly this Government thinks that every war will be like the last one, and proper defence isn't needed.
As Vapour also points out, it isn't just war operations that may involve an air threat, and they need not have sophisticated weaponry. An obsolete MiG with a driver on a one way mission...
Suspicion breeds confidence
As Vapour says, the T42 isn't at her best in the littoral (where future operations will tend to be - and the most dangerous place) and only has two missiles on the launcher at any one time. Against a salvo of supersonic missiles, isn't the T23 with 32 vertical launch Sea Wolf better?
Last edited by Navaleye; 21st Feb 2005 at 10:39.
When the Sea Harrier issue was discussed on Newsnight in April/May 2002, Lewis Moonie stated that the most likely airborne threat was from missiles, and claimed that the Sea Harrier was no defence from this threat. Yes, he actually said that!
Meanwhile, I found something of interest on the DLO website - Embarked Aviation.
Meanwhile, I found something of interest on the DLO website - Embarked Aviation.
Reliability
Just out of interest is the reliability of a T42 more or less than that of a pair of Sea Harriers on CAP?
Missed this at the time, but Illustrious recently embarked and operated her first fixed wing aircraft post refit. See this link. Also some nice pictures in the Photo Gallery.
Missed this at the time, but Illustrious recently embarked and operated her first fixed wing aircraft post refit. See this link. Also some nice pictures in the Photo Gallery.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Just out of interest is the reliability of a T42 more or less than that of a pair of Sea Harriers on CAP?
Extended point defence would mean Sea Wolf would it not? In which case why are we losing T23s, presumably in preference to T42s? Since the Fleet is losing the most inportant layer of anti air defence (SHAR), the question is whether lots of fairly short range missiles are better than a pair of medium range ones - that still lack the range to prevent hostile aircraft from getting close enough to fire very nasty missiles?
Surely keeping ALL our Sea Wolf armed ships, and at least some Sea Harriers (perhaps just one squadron - or even just some kept in reserve?) would be the best way to avoid suffering needless losses or having our expensive and vulnerable amphibious forces sunk or rendered unusable due to a small number of enemy aircraft?
By reliability I mean the probability that it will work when needed.
Surely keeping ALL our Sea Wolf armed ships, and at least some Sea Harriers (perhaps just one squadron - or even just some kept in reserve?) would be the best way to avoid suffering needless losses or having our expensive and vulnerable amphibious forces sunk or rendered unusable due to a small number of enemy aircraft?
By reliability I mean the probability that it will work when needed.
Suspicion breeds confidence
It is better to have medium/long range weapons that have a useful capability against the threats they face. The reality is that because of its old launchers, old radars and limited low level capabilities, Sea Dart does not always fly. Sea Wolf has a much higher chance of launching and hitting its target, but they will be dangerously close - much much closer than you would want them. I'm not saying SD is useless, its not, you only have to look at Exeter's performance on May 30th 1982 to see that, but the limitations of such systems are well known to attacking pilots and its more likely that the threat will come from sea skimmers than dumb bombs. Fancy taking on 6 Penguins with a T42?
If Sea Dart struggled to be effective against aircraft threats then you can guess the outcome against missiles. T45/PAAMS evens the score very well, but it still can't engage targets 200nm out which is where you want to be fighting your enemy. History tells us that when ships fight aircraft, they usually lose in the end, no matter how much faith you have in your weapons systems.
If Sea Dart struggled to be effective against aircraft threats then you can guess the outcome against missiles. T45/PAAMS evens the score very well, but it still can't engage targets 200nm out which is where you want to be fighting your enemy. History tells us that when ships fight aircraft, they usually lose in the end, no matter how much faith you have in your weapons systems.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Loathe as I am to post on this increasingly repetitive thread, it may interest the pro-SHAR chappies out there to learn that (according to this weeks Flt Int), the Indians are about to conclude a deal to upgrade their 17 Sea Harrier FRS51 (SHAR FRS1 equivalent).
The upgrade will enable the ac to carry the Rafael Derby Active radar BVR AAM (the FRS51s are currently limited to old Magic 3 IR AAMs). Presumably, the upgrade will include a new Israeli radar to support the new missile. The upgrade work will be carried out by Hindustan Aeronautics.
I can almost hear WEBF's keyboard going into melt down from here!!!!!
Regards,
M2
The upgrade will enable the ac to carry the Rafael Derby Active radar BVR AAM (the FRS51s are currently limited to old Magic 3 IR AAMs). Presumably, the upgrade will include a new Israeli radar to support the new missile. The upgrade work will be carried out by Hindustan Aeronautics.
I can almost hear WEBF's keyboard going into melt down from here!!!!!
Regards,
M2
Last edited by Magic Mushroom; 23rd Feb 2005 at 19:59.
Suspicion breeds confidence
But everyone knows that Sea Harriers can't fly in hot areas like the Bay of Bengal or the Indian Ocean so what's the point? Sorry I've so busy reading the MoD's lies lately that I'm starting to believe them.
Seriously, I'm surprised that the FRS51s are still flying after 22 years without any sort of update. If they want to keep any naval fixed wing air over the next 5 years I don't think they have much choice.
Seriously, I'm surprised that the FRS51s are still flying after 22 years without any sort of update. If they want to keep any naval fixed wing air over the next 5 years I don't think they have much choice.
Last edited by Navaleye; 24th Feb 2005 at 10:53.
Isn't there also talk that India will get hold of a STOBAR version of the Hawkeye? Any chance this will have implications for MASC?
Navy News has a story about 801 NAS, but I can't make the link work.
On a slightly different note, look at the way the OPV contrat is being spun for all its worth. Armed with a 30mm gun, despite the fairly large size. Wow, still can't expect them to fit anything larger, as more is less as the Government says so.
Navy News has a story about 801 NAS, but I can't make the link work.
On a slightly different note, look at the way the OPV contrat is being spun for all its worth. Armed with a 30mm gun, despite the fairly large size. Wow, still can't expect them to fit anything larger, as more is less as the Government says so.
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 25th Feb 2005 at 21:55.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Navaleye wrote ...
"Seriously, I'm surprised that the FRS51s are still flying after 22 years without any sort of update. If they want to keep any naval fixed wing air over the next 5 years I don't think they have much choice."
... i'm not! they operated Seahawks (as in RNHF stalwart NOT the chopper) untill it was replaced by SHAR in 1984 and they got those 2nd hand from the Marinefleiger and Dutch Fleet air arm.
"Seriously, I'm surprised that the FRS51s are still flying after 22 years without any sort of update. If they want to keep any naval fixed wing air over the next 5 years I don't think they have much choice."
... i'm not! they operated Seahawks (as in RNHF stalwart NOT the chopper) untill it was replaced by SHAR in 1984 and they got those 2nd hand from the Marinefleiger and Dutch Fleet air arm.
Those MiG-29Ks wont be coming within the next 4-5 years. It will take a minimum of that long to get the Gorshkov refurbed with jump ramp et al. And the Viraat+SHAR combo is slated to be around for six years or so.... incidentally, you guys did a super job in building that ship 
Those Derbys are needed NOW. Of course, we're more a white water navy than a blue water one so the Su-30MKI Mk.2s (aided by the Il-78MKI) will be able to provide some top cover in a shooting war against our friendly western neighbour.... but how long?
While we're at it... how does one stop the PJ-10 Brahmos? I mean, apart from taking out the launch platform, obviously. WHat current SAMs have a hope of getting to the missile first?
Those Derbys are needed NOW. Of course, we're more a white water navy than a blue water one so the Su-30MKI Mk.2s (aided by the Il-78MKI) will be able to provide some top cover in a shooting war against our friendly western neighbour.... but how long?
While we're at it... how does one stop the PJ-10 Brahmos? I mean, apart from taking out the launch platform, obviously. WHat current SAMs have a hope of getting to the missile first?
interesting.... I have little idea about British/European missile programs, so I'd barely heard about the seawolf. Had to google for it..... from the official specs (even with the mandatory pinch o' salt), it looks impressive.
How many such missiles (of the same class) are there, i wonder. And considering that MBDA is aggresively pushing its stuff to India, I'd love this to be part of our Navy. But one doubts the chances of that happening in the immediate future....
How many such missiles (of the same class) are there, i wonder. And considering that MBDA is aggresively pushing its stuff to India, I'd love this to be part of our Navy. But one doubts the chances of that happening in the immediate future....
Suspicion breeds confidence
Sea Wolf was designed to deal with the very best Russian anti ship missiles. Its tracking and fire control systems have evolved over 25 years which means that it can defeat Brahmos, Sunburns, Yakhonts or anything else thrown at it. It's the software that makes the difference and it can be updated on a daily basis. The nearest equivalent is Barak but that is not designed to handle supersonic targets. Sea Wolf is. It is very good at it. I would rate it as the most effective anti-missile system in the world bar none. Brahmos is a big weapon and would emit a very high IR signature and the latest evolution of Sea Dart would also have a good chance against it. T45/PAAMS/Aster is even better, better than even AEGIS. The tide has turned.
Sea Wolf is in service with Chile, Brazil and I think Indonesia, but not with the same level of capability as the RN.
I hope this helps.
Sea Wolf is in service with Chile, Brazil and I think Indonesia, but not with the same level of capability as the RN.
I hope this helps.
Last edited by Navaleye; 26th Feb 2005 at 17:08.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Navaleye,
As well as reminding us all that the Sea Harrier can't fly in high temperatures you forgot to mention that they can't fly in high humidity either. Problem with a lack of dehumidifiers in the cabin airflow leading to excessive misting and water ingress into safety critical instrumentation if I remember correctly the Service Deviation I was invited to sign before a recent deployment!
As well as reminding us all that the Sea Harrier can't fly in high temperatures you forgot to mention that they can't fly in high humidity either. Problem with a lack of dehumidifiers in the cabin airflow leading to excessive misting and water ingress into safety critical instrumentation if I remember correctly the Service Deviation I was invited to sign before a recent deployment!
Suspicion breeds confidence
That problem has existed for years in loads of aircraft types. I think the Mig15 had the same problem vs the F86. If you couldn't outfly the plane then outfly its aircon system. Have you been to the Bay of Bengal? I have, its about as humid as a turkish bath. The Indians have no problems flying Shars in those conditions.
Same problem at Brawdy in the summer of '76. Roasting hot day - but inside one's Hunter it was raining so hard it was impossible to see out - or to read most of the instruments. Much frantic wiping with aircrew glove....I even considered slowing down, sticking down full flap and opening the hood.
Wretched Hawkers - did they learn nothing about cockpit conditioning from their failures in earlier years when it came to the bona jet?
Wretched Hawkers - did they learn nothing about cockpit conditioning from their failures in earlier years when it came to the bona jet?
It's not just aircraft that have problems with operating in some conditions. All sorts of different equipment has difficulties when it is too hot, too cold, too humid....etc.
Without the Sea Harrier, we need all the Sea Wolf armed ships as possible. Unfortunately, three are being lost - and their vertical launch Sea Wolf systems with them.
Without the Sea Harrier, we need all the Sea Wolf armed ships as possible. Unfortunately, three are being lost - and their vertical launch Sea Wolf systems with them.