AFAIK the PLAN is to have the same software build in the FMS as in the F-35 aircraft. Perhaps there will be a time lag and I've mentioned I think that the UK F-35B FMS probably needs the SRVL info but that has not been cleared in reality yet - next year though. I see that storm - teacups AHOY! :}

From the latest DOTE report FMS software development and updates run about 20 months behind updates to the Mission Data Files which include the regional threat environment. That’s for the US forces. Additionally release for each version to each partner nation for their simulators needs to be individually certified. Being not unduly pessimistic I would assume that the threat would updated at least annually and that would mean the FMS always running about 2/3 years and 2 versions behind both the latest flight management software and threat environment in the aircraft?

“.....The program is behind in developing and fielding training simulators, referred to as F-35 Full Mission Simulators (FMS), to train pilots, both at the integrated training centers for initial F-35 pilot training and at the operational locations. The FMS is a multi-ship, man-in-the-loop, F-35 mission systems software-in-the-loop simulation using virtual threats, it is used to train both U.S. and partner pilots.......

Since the FMS runs F-35 mission systems software, it requires Block 3F mission data, integrated with virtual threats, to build the threat environment simulation (TES). It currently takes up to 20 months for the program to build the TES after new mission data are available.”....

Going by the latest PMQ's, the "Magic money tree" is in for a damn good shakin. One important factor for the F-35 is cost / capability. Interesting that the capability, and technology transfer, value of the F-35 to the UK could be retained without the ongoing cost of the carriers, if the carriers are scrapped. Certainly, a likely possibility for an insolvent UK.

OAP

The simulator is treated as the first aircraft after the Proof Installation; both in hardware and software terms. If the sim isn't at the same build standard, then you can't demonstrate you are the requisite maturity level, so can't get money to enter production. You are only allowed a lag during development. Any lag is a huge red flag.

Let's see what you say when the full capability endowing processor and software turn out to be non existent...

R.O.F.L

Hmmm. Looks like your ability to discern capital cost from operating cost is up there with your ability to distinguish fact from opinion....

I'm not sure what the value of the technology transfer is if we are never going to build an advanced strike aircraft on our own.... tho ' I suppose we can use it in the next multi-national effort in 2040.............

Any tech transfer doesn't just translate into ability to build LO aircraft of our own, although in an ideal world that would be, er, ideal... It's also extremely important in the development of weapons systems, avionics, ECM, detection etc, both of existing and future equipment...

-RP

that's my point - it's going to be a longggggggggggggg way ahead

Going by the latest PMQ's, the "Magic money tree" is in for a damn good shakin. One important factor for the F-35 is cost / capability. Interesting that the capability, and technology transfer, value of the F-35 to the UK could be retained without the ongoing cost of the carriers, if the carriers are scrapped. Certainly, a likely possibility for an insolvent UK.

OAPOh yes! I get your drift...we have spent £Billions on the wrong capability, let's just carry-on spending more £Billions!:ugh: Well, it isn't going to happen. Even without a regime change in the UK, the plug on the magic money tree is going to get pulled pretty soon and those floating Gin palaces are going to be scrapped.

OAP

They won't be scrapped - too much capital invested and the names!! Think of the headline on the Daily Mail!!!!!

No, they'll spend 95% of their time parked at Portsmouth with a crew that will be too small to operate them but still would be better off used elsewhere

I wouldn't bet on it. Gibraltar will be an ideal forward operating base and I know studies are underway now about using the South Mole. Many many moons ago I remember see three carriers docked there.

Talking to the locals it is largely a matter of dredging as this hasn't been done for many years. The last ship I went on that couldn't dock there was the Canberra.

Using Gib saves a three day transit, and could be at Suez in just over 4 days. It could even attack Taranto on the way. 🤣🤔

Don't worry Harry, I don't mind if Fallon has to go!

OAP

Gib would save a few problems for sure

a) it's out of the way of the Great British Media so wouldn't be so obvious a long term parking spot

b) the weather is better so you'll spnd less on paint and the caretakers will be happier

c) The Spaniards might invade and take a carrier as a "bonus"

d) it''s a lot closer to the scrapping sites in Turkey - got to think long term

So after spending millions modernising the home port the idea is to ship them off someplace else because it's "handy (and the weathers better)

Makes a LOT of sense... out of sight, out of mind...

Shipping Movements
Portsmouth Harbour shipping movements Tuesday 24 October 2017

Is the strike called off?

Oh dear, General Sir Richard Barrons, ex CO JFC, talking about defence cuts on R4 this morning. Slotted after depressing news on the economy, he declared that the UK has "no contemporary habit of thinking about defence of the homeland". What was he doing as a VVSO? He talked about; the threats from Russia and China, the need for 80,000 Army with 30,000 reserve, the need for the RAF to be able to deploy the Army and the need for landing craft. One might guess the capabilities he chose to talk about are seriously under threat! :uhoh:

OAP

Onceapilot, worth a read...

Capabilities Review: Squaring Naval Ambitions, Priorities & Resources | Oxford Research Group

Possibly the most depressing thing I've read in a year........... but unfortutnately horribly accurate I think

"The real problem, then, for both the Navy and the Ministry of Defence is a surfeit of ambition to deploy military force relative to both fiscal resources and strategic reality."

There is clearly a massive gap between the cash planned and the resources we think we need

Looks like it will end in tears again..................

PS it's a copyright article so be careful how much you cut 'n paste

Thanks ORAC.

What gets my goat is, we have had a VVSO basically say..."we have spent the money on the wrong things* " and expecting more money. Ha! They are talking defence budget % because it sounds less. They have seriously blown it!

*The carriers

OAP

Now those kinds of numbers of Troops should really make the Russians and Chinese shiver in their Sea Boots!:ugh:

It would take more than 80,000 to simply look after the prisoners, let alone fight a war.

"Times " today quotes Janes - says MoD talking to Brazil and Chile about sale of both assault ships and two T23's maybe as early as 2018. Two minehunters also laid up last month instead of being refurbished

MoD denies "any engagement with Brazil & Chile"

Strike, what strike, RN going on strike? New rumour......

The T26 is going to be One man Operated.............

The UK would seem to be fairly hard to invade.. a large standing army is irrelevant. .
A powerful navy and airforce is not

True - as long as someone notices Moscow buying up all the Eurostar tickets from Calais one day...................

Probelm is you need troops to intervene elsewhere... something our politicians are addicted to....................

Next Monday 30 Oct 2017 Portsmouth schedule has QE movement now:

Yes, she has put to sea (yesterday - Mon 30 Oct 17) for the next stage of sea trials.

Captain of Portsmouth Naval Base, Captain Bill Oliphant said: “HMS Queen Elizabeth has been in Portsmouth Naval Base for two months of planned maintenance to allow her to sail to complete her sea trials today.

“This period at sea will mark an extremely significant milestone in the life of the ship leading towards her acceptance into the Royal Navy at her commissioning later this year, back in her home port of Portsmouth.”

As for earlier trials: Her first phase of sea trials, conducted earlier this year, demonstrated the platform stability and manoeuvrability. Commanding Officer Captain Jerry Kyd, said “She was stable and strong, which is important for aviation operations from an aircraft carrier flight deck."

Are they going to rename her HMS Theresa May? :hmm::hmm:

No! That was the original name of the Mary Rose....turned turtle on first outing! :eek:

OAP

Turned turtle in battle 35 years after first commissioning you mean.

Thanks for that correction 'Bing': The History of the Mary Rose - 1511-1545 - The Mary Rose

Jug O' Naughty: HMS Queen Elizabeth leaving Portsmouth 30 Oct 2017


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyooT-YYFAE

Fake news! :)

OAP

A bit of slap & tickle here methinks. :} Stay out of my freakin' way (but camera angle makes it seem worse).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2B2_vO5au0

Have seen this video in two or three places now and something about it isn't quite right. The first and third segments have clearly been speeded up, while the middle segment (with the Merlin visible) is the correct speed. Main clue is the speed of rotation of the long distance radar, and the fact that in the final segment the ship is doing an improbable impression of HMS Manxman. At times you can also make out the reflections of people on the carrier's bridge waddling around as if in an early silent movie. Still good though.

A comment from 'one who knows': "...DDG captain got a thermonuke bollocking on the radio..." Shades of MELBOURNE past - lest we forget.