Originally Posted by Treble one
(Post 10608285)
'Dutch Air Force Chief gets far too excited over his new toy'.
It was most remiss of me to not declare the winner sooner. Treble One wins for his post. I had considered a similar opener, but bottled out. |
Originally Posted by airsound
(Post 10618507)
Explaining why he's suspending operational testing until next summer, Robert Behler, Director of IOT&E (Initial Operational Test and Evaluation), says
So, if we take that alongside the idea from Australia that the whole thing may become useless after 2030, it seems as if we have the most expensive weapons system ever produced, which will actually be in productive service for less than 10 years. airsound |
Have we all gone completely barmy?
Airsound No doubt all those "jobs" and industrial offsets are "good value" as you will no doubt shortly be informed. However the fact that 72% of the UK's total buy are not upgradeable to the final "base" wargoing standard should tell you all you need to know about "good value". PS have they started to introduce external fuel carriage alongside finding a magic cure for chronically short fatigue life. :bored: |
Originally Posted by Gnadenburg
(Post 10618138)
An extraordinary "shopping list" likely to include the B21 Raider and ABM technology. This, after our JSF purchase, required an expensive government intervention and purchase of an interim fighter and a change of mind on needing Growlers to escort JSF. The interim Super Hornet purchase and the unexpected Growler buy, were both deemed unnecessary at early stages by RAAF chiefs.
You have to ask, what's wrong with RAAF leadership? If we are going to be equipped to fight China there's a lot more than big ticket items required. Look at Taiwan for example. Air base hardening and force dispersal. I think the taxpaying public would like to see a more pragmatic RAAF first, before asking for billion dollar bombers! |
The ex- Chiefs are both quoted as saying Australia may need to invest in a strategic bomber - which suggests the B21. May not be the RAAF's public position, but I'd imagine the rapid strategic upheaval and Australia's submarine fiasco, presents an emerging case for more long range firepower.
But as I mentioned above, there's pressing priorities beyond big ticket shopping lists, if China is imposing itself in Australia's part of the Pacific. |
Sunday Express did an article on the new carrier today. Describing the F-35 that will fly from it they reported that the F-35 has a max speed of mach 6 !!
Is this correct? Or just another journo who has not bothered to check his facts? |
F-35 Demo Seen from Sunrise Mountain
|
If one UK Carrier were equipped with the F35 and the other had the Russian S400 SAM system on its deck which would be the more effective airspace denial weapon?
Nothing fancy by way of integration just a landline from the S400 control cabin into the ships Ops Centre. |
Without a complete redesign to cope with a moving datum and a radar rolling and pitching with no data correction for guidance - the S400 would merely be deck cargo.
Then there is the issue that it designed to rearmed from trucks with special loaders - which won’t be present. It will also immediately start to degrade from the salt laden atmosphere, for which it is not designed. Finally, of course, everything on a ship, including the bomb and missiles warheads , are designed to burn harmlessly in a shipboard fire rather than explode - and I doubt the relevant design work and tests were done for the S-400. So any sensible Captain wouldn’t allow them in his ship. |
Probably not the one that got sunk by a submarine on day three out of port
|
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 10620679)
F-35 Demo Seen from Sunrise Mountain
|
I thought it was a pilot light, showing the gas was on....
|
Originally Posted by Bigpants
(Post 10621181)
If one UK Carrier were equipped with the F35 and the other had the Russian S400 SAM system on its deck which would be the more effective airspace denial weapon?
Nothing fancy by way of integration just a landline from the S400 control cabin into the ships Ops Centre. |
Originally Posted by SARF
(Post 10621362)
Probably not the one that got sunk by a submarine on day three out of port
What's big as a house, burns 20 liters of fuel every hour, puts out a ****load of smoke and noise and cuts an apple into three pieces? A Soviet machine made to cut apples into four pieces. |
I was suggesting that a SAM system on a ship is a more effective 24/7 air defence or airspace denial weapon than an F35.
I appreciate re the point above that one cannot bolt an S400 to a ship and expect it to work but there are some very effective marine SAM systems out there. Nothing to stop an aircraft carrier using its own ASW helicopters plus its defensive screen including our own submarines to avoid the threat from enemy submarines. I feel the F35 at sea is all about its ability to strike at the enemy which brings me back to the issue of cost effectiveness hence remain sceptical about the aircraft and choice of platform. I would scrap/sell the carriers because we have not the means ($) to militarily deploy them and the UK's appetite for foreign adventures with the USA long gone. |
Originally Posted by Bigpants
(Post 10623283)
I was suggesting that a SAM system on a ship is a more effective 24/7 air defence or airspace denial weapon than an F35.
I appreciate re the point above that one cannot bolt an S400 to a ship and expect it to work but there are some very effective marine SAM systems out there. |
Problem is the F-35 sacrifices range for stealth.
Nothing wrong with that but it means a USN Carrier Group has to get a lot closer tho' the bad guys than they did 30 years ago - or invest even more in refueling and drones. In 1976 the average range of a carrier airwing was around 950 miles - an F-35 has a range of around 680/700 miles |
Originally Posted by Bigpants
(Post 10623283)
the UK's appetite for foreign adventures with the USA long gone.
AOC 1 Gp has just been discussing Carrier Strike Group Ops in San Diego - including the joint deployment with USMC F-35Bs embarked in 2021. "A great 2 days spent at NAS North Island with our Right now there is a US / UK Defense Conference taking place on HMS QNLZ "This ship reflects the future... the Atlantic Future Forum exists to deepen the unique Defence and technology relationship between the US and UK” -- Admiral Tony Radakin CB ADC, First Sea Lord & Chief of the Naval Staff" There has also been a trilateral agreement just signed between US, UK and Japan USN CNO "By signing this Trilateral agreement we strengthen our naval bonds & codify our continued dedication to a free & open maritime commons. There is much to celebrate in our trilateral relationship; indeed the whole is greater than the sum of its parts." |
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....bd4b590c62.jpg
The 3 admirals remind me so much of a certain sketch from The Frost Report of 1966: |
Forgive me if this has been covered - I haven’t seen it - but what happens when the (singular) engine fails during a shipborne ski-jump take-off? How is that planned for and handled? Is there, for instance, some equivalent for the V1 of a conventional runway take-off?
airsound |
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:00. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.