F-35s to Red Flag
 

What a disappointing and frustrating start to the det, all diverted to Lajes, https://theaviationist.com/2020/01/2...rted-to-lajes/

Any of the usual suspects blamed the carriers yet?

Not even the RN thinks it can get it's carriers to Nevada...................... :E

Are you sure? Have you spoken to Sharkey?

:eek:

I suppose putting them on a RORO freighter for the crossing wasn't a choice.

They would but all the RORO are sequestered for Brexit contingency...

Book some seats on Delta for the pilots and send them as "emotional support items"

No doubt '10% Carlos' (if he hasn't yet retired) will have done his usual excellent job of sorting out some hotel rooms etc.? He once put me in the presidential suite of the Hotel Nasce Agua - "Special room for Commandante!" as he put it.

I can't help wondering quite what sort of a 'fuel anomaly' would have caused the whole trail to divert? While the F-35B does have rather short legs, there are few abort aerodromes available on the southern route. Trailing 3 x Jags from Lajes to Halifax often wasn't quite doable if the tanker went single hose, so a decision had to be made as to the need to use 2 tankers in cell or risk going single hose.

Beags,

As I know naught about such things.....why would a routing around the typical northern route structure not have afforded more flexibility with access to more diversions than appears to be available on the routing selected?

Is there an advantage to going south rather than north that I do not understand?

I would think the aircraft could be either landed or craned aboard one of the new carriers and transported to close proximity of the USA or Canada and then be flown off to continue on their merry way as a legitimate option.

Only the QE can handle F-35'a right now according to the article below and she's still in port.

Thursday, 23rd January 2020, 12:22 pm
https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/de...smouth-1373626The 65,000-tonne giant has been given a window to leave the naval base between 11.15am and midday, the Queen’s Harbour Master has announced. It comes after the Royal Navy cancelled an earlier departure of the £3.1bn aircraft carrier on Tuesday. The navy refused to confirm why the trip had been postponed. Speaking to The News on Tuesday evening, a spokeswoman said: ‘HMS Queen Elizabeth did not sail today. This will not affect her training programme.’

She added: ‘We do not discuss ship’s programmes in detail and all ship’s movements are subject to change.’ Navy sources have not yet officially confirmed whether the vessel will set sail from Portsmouth tomorrow. An announcement could be made later today or early tomorrow on the Royal Navy’s social media accounts.

It’s not clear how long the vessel will be at sea for. However, it’s understood the ship, when it does leave, will continue with a work-up that will see her preparing for her first operational deployment in 2021. These preparations will include flight trials of the F-35 stealth jet in British waters. Meanwhile, Queen Elizabeth’s sister ship, HMS Prince of Wales, is also scheduled to move from her home at the naval base’s Victory Jetty tomorrow. If Queen Elizabeth is given the green-light to depart, Prince of Wales will be shifted over to the neighbouring Princess Royal Jetty, where planned maintenance work will continue.

Prince of Wales is expected to leave Portsmouth on her first overseas adventure later this year, where she will sail to Florida. The 280m giant will carry out her first tests of the new multi-million pound stealth jet. Her first operational deployment is expected to take place in 2023

Well, it seems 5 F-35s landed in Lajes but only 4 continued west yesterday.

RAF strewing aircraft around the globe on a trail?

Tell me it isn’t true!

Survivability aspects of the northern route are more problematic in winter. The UK no longer has any long range SAR assets - yet another 'capability holiday'....

Using an aircraft carrier to take 5 jets across the pond is surely doable, but not really an easy or cheap option. The bunkering, crewing, provisioning, impact on scheduling with say 2 weeks of sailing time, loss of the ship and aircraft for training times, etc would be enormous.

I also note the Spanish P-3 borrowed for long range SAR support.....as Beagle noted, another capability gap until P-8 comes on line.

But if the Aircraft can be deployed to the other side of the World without the Carriers, do we need the Carriers?

(Light the blue touch paper and retire to a safe distance)

KB

Are there any military aircrew left on this website these days?

Given that your own sell by date has long since expired, how is that a valid query, Beags?
You are not, any longer.
So why do you impugn others?
My sell by date expired in 2005.
I am a 'used to be' who still loves that Military Aviation Profession and advocates for it.
Take your wet blanket act and park it on the ramp way out there, where the fire fighters practice their craft on long dead airframes.
You'll be in good company.

Who is "we"
Kilo B?
(yeah, that rhymes)

BEagle
 

May I elucidate on LWs post.

Here is my honest appraisal. If you don’t want honesty then please skip this post.

I have spoken with several current aircrew about Pprune and you’d be amazed at how often your name crops up.

This thread is a great example of why that is. A question about F35 turns into a tale about 10% Carlos.

We all know of your past experiences and expertise but the minute you start off down that track many people lose interest.

It is for reasons like that, that many people jokingly refer to this forum as the Military Nostalgia forum.

Now before everyone jumps down my throat I am not trying to be offensive or disrespectful. All of us look up to those that went before us and value their knowledge and experience.

What I am suggesting is that it is often best to consider if a thread really needs an historical tale to make it better.

I try as much as possible to only comment on things I know about. And where my inputs can be relevant.

I’ve trailed through the Azores but it was 15 years ago and not in an F35. We also intended to stop there. But that input would have no relevance to the topic.

You also need to consider the modern world.

The infamous AVM Walker address to CQWI should serve as a reminder why current aircrew need to think very carefully about what they post.

Commercial sensitivities also play a huge part. Is it any wonder that staff at MFTS locations, for instance, stay out of the numerous MFTS bashing threads?

Anyway, I’m sorry if you don’t like my post and please everyone don’t think we don’t want to hear tall tales but BEagle, you did ask.

BV

Bob

I have some sympathy with your irritation on thread drift but I really believe it would have been better to PM Beagle rather than call him out in public. We're supposed to play the ball , not the man

PPrune isn't just about technical queries and news - it's a community and that means a wide variety of people - some of whom irritate others occasionally but who add to the sum of the whole place.