Beedall has updated his excellent site a little and has a new editorial re the latest CVF machinations. I love the comment about the fact that the whole of WW2 took less time than the RN/UK Govt have taken to decide on whether to build the CVF 😮 :diablo:
Presumably these wings are not of a new design but just same old same old ?
Perhaps the RN will wait and see how the AIP boats shake out and then build their own if the technology proves truly mature with few drawbacks. Can’t really see the money being available at the moment though, with what they have spent on Astute.
Well they ‘only’ have 20 plus vessels to lose if you include the assault ships. As to whether the smaller SSK’s could ever fire off enough conventional torpedoes to sink a Supercarrier before they were scragged by one of the escorts or airwing is a moot point, but they could no doubt seriously disable one. I suspect only the USN knows the answer and that fact that they have had the Gottland on trials for 2 years suggests the threat is pretty real as others have said.
There are a few 3 engined military helicopters.
Can’t see anyone going Nimrod, and I am not sure if its even being marketed. There may be some spare airframes in Storage (the RAF can’t afford to run as many as it used to) but the costs would be prohibitive as the UK government have found, as 90 odd percent of the aircraft are new. The MR4A has got a new wing that is apparently optimised for that kind of work.
This version seems to now have a wider role than just maritime.
There have been a few C-17’s in at Stansted in the last couple of years and lots of 124’s. Based on those that I have seen there is no comparison, the C-17 can typically take off and land in a little less space than a 737, the 124’s usually need much more runway. You only have to look at the two aircrafts thrust to weight ratios to see which one will accelerate to take off speed first, there is a 20% plus difference. I would say from what I have seen that typical take off distance is 600-1000m longer for the 124.
Exactly, now we have moved into a different kind of warfare they are probably more use in Littoral ops in support of special forces, although realistically they might just be a bit too large for that, but I think you can construct a case for most of the other SSK’s in use at the moment by various Navies.
Guys, Sorry to dig up an old thread and bulldose all the sceptics to one side, but it appears that IT WORKS 😮
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6064620.stm
Someone in the military presumably will now take this seriously. No doubt it will all go quiet and we won’t hear anything about it for another 7 or 8 years and then some secret aircraft will break cover. :diablo: Well lets just wait and see shall we :rolleyes: 😀
Thats the version of the F-35 the Brits are getting. :diablo: Tony Blair forgot to mention to the MOD that he was forced to make a few technical compromises in order to get operational sovereignty 😮 :rolleyes:
Putting aside the lack of AIP, to what extent were the Upholder/ Victoria class a reasonable design ? I notice they have hardly been mentioned yet, but didn’t they have many features found only on the Neuks ?
How many Navy’s use SSK’s in Blue-water conditions these days, or are most generally confined to coastal duties ? Indeed how many of the SSK’s are designed for genuine blue-water operation a long way from home ?
Defence talk today reported that India turned down the last 8 Harrier FA-2’s that the UK government has offered them. I think they should seal them up in an atmospherically controlled shed somewhere on a just in case basis.
Eurofighter will be a far tougher opponent, and as both sides will have had a similar level of experience with each aircraft so would start reasonably equal.
I must admit I am more confident about the future of Japanese aviation now that Honda have made a move into aviation. If anyone will get the Japanese ducks in a straight line in the long term, it will be Honda.
Looks like the Indians are doing their very best on the hospitality front (Thumbs up Smiley)