FedaykinOne thing that is certain the people in the carrier project office are probably busy smashing cups against the wall at the moment.
Looking aside from the carrier it does throw some interesting light on the GR4 replacement. Certainly the RAFs eyes are turning onto unmanned for the penetration strike component. Also with the noises about project seed-corn in respect of the MPA role I wonder if the RAF are turning their mind to reviving the concept of using the P8 as a CALCM carrier with Storm Shadow much as they were thinking with Nimrod MRA4. With Voyager support P8 and Storm Shadow would give the RAF a quick response global strike capability.
FedaykinI agree with your conclusions on your blog Liger30 but it does fill me with a certain degree of despair! F35B means we are locked into the success or failure of that program!
If it happens I will be interested to see how the government try to spin it as a positive. Probably lots of smart procurement tosh…
FedaykinThis is the comment I placed on the Defence Management website:
Talk about switching back to F35B is foolish now or going to a fantasy Sea Typhoon. The program needs de-risking and the cost of the F35C needs to be pushed as far as possible to the right. Nominal OSD for Tornado GR4 is 2025, thats when really need F35C as a replacement for that type in the penetration strike role. With current build schedule we probably won’t have a carrier fitted out with EMALS and AAG until 2019, that means we couldn’t even conduct deck landing trials until 2020! Those landing trials can be conducted with American and French help using the Super Hornet or Rafale. Post 2020 they are talking about operating about six aircraft on PoW during that initial slow work up period. Rather then take the riskier, costlier early F35C this can be done with a lease of Super Hornet or Rafale. It will take about ten years to be in a position skill wise to operate a larger airgroup of 12 to 36 aircraft.
This gives a lower risk and cost schedule:
Operate leased Hornet or Rafale until 2030 with F35C test airframes making occasional visits.
Draw down of Tornado GR4 by 2025 with new F35C taking on role along side Tranche 3A Typhoon from mid decade.
Stand down of leased aircraft around 2030 with F35C purchased from later and cheaper production run of the type entering carrier service.
On a side note if the will is there QE can be dragged back into Rosyth in the 2020 to 2030 time period for a refit to CATOBAR configuration. That keeps skills in Rosyth that would wither otherwise and dovetails with the significant overhaul PoW will need after more then a decade of service.
De-risk the program, de-couple the aircraft choice from the carrier build program and push costs as far as possible to the right in respect of F35C. The USN plans to have the F35C in service for a long time procuring LATER will be cheaper then taking earlier examples!
FedaykinNice fit out, belly radar, SLAR, optics turret and other cameras. Personally I think the Falklands Island government should purchase a couple of these if the oil takes off. It would also help patrol the fisheries complementing the Dorada and Sigma. It would also be a useful adjunct to British military capabilities on the Island as it could provide over the horizon targeting and a basic ASW/ASuW capability (fitted for but not with Stingray and Sea Skua). In the event of increased tensions/hostilities it is seconded to military command and mated up with UK MOD provided munitions, much as is already planned with the FIDF.
FedaykinThe USA would have no problem whatsoever Japan developing a carrier strike capability, the Pentagon would be delighted and American manufacturers like Boeing, Grumman and Lockheed Martin would be loud cheerleaders due to the possible sales that could entail from that development. With American defence cuts and the new policy focus on the Pacific, allied nations increasing their capability would be welcome.
FedaykinSome proper build news, PoW bow section off to Scotland:
http://www.northdevongazette.co.uk/news/appledore_celebrates_another_warship_milestone_1_1233545
FedaykinAs for missile CEP, this is a measure of probability. One method of increasing the probability of hitting your target is to have a more accurate missile. Another method would be to have more missiles, and as we are all aware, Iran has rather a lot of missiles. Nobody here has the certain knowledge about Iranian missile CEP, quantity, or how Israeli defences will actually perform, and so we cannot dismiss there being a probability of Iranian success at damaging or destroying the Dimona facility.
I agree, what the Hawks in America and Israel seem to fail to realise is Iran has been busy bees when it comes to producing IRBM on mobile launchers. The Aerospace Force of the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution (AFAGIR) – Yes really-has several thousand conventional missiles at its command plenty of which can reach Israel. I highly doubt any Iranian counter strike will be that indiscriminate when it comes to targeting! All Israel population centres will be targeted regardless of CEP. Throw in the anti ship missiles they have and it would be bloody!
FedaykinWhat’s more interesting is that Thai AV8S Matador behind NAX-3…is it even airworthy anymore. I haven’t heard if any recent flying off the Thai navies white elephant of a carrier.
FedaykinWell I would rather be glass half full on this matter Badger…I think Dassault or Boeing would leap at a chance to get their type into UK service even if it is for a fixed period. Both have suggested that is possible and I am going to take them on that, indeed short term solutions could end up being long term ones but lets cross that bridge when we get there. Personally I rather like the idea of either type seeing extended UK service as they are a lower cost lower risk solution.
In respect of the Australians, yes it was a straight purchase but it was always on the basis of a possible USN buy back…that they are probably going to keep them is to be applauded (unless you are Carlo Kopp). The French will probably have more Rafale then carriers to put them on around the time PoW comes on-line so again some form of lease solution is more then possible in my opinion. For the French it has the advantage of reducing the cost of Rafale operations.
What I don’t want to see is a return to F35B, the aircraft still has significant risk and cost. Also it locks the RN into STOVL operations which is more restrictive in my opinion.
FedaykinWell its working for the Australians in respect of their Super Hornet and I would think the French would jump at the chance to shift some Rafale M even after the mega Indian deal…so I would argue that something could always be worked out Badger.
FedaykinI don’t know why people keep bashing on about the OV-10 it won’t happen for a number of reasons several of them major!
Firstly it isn’t in production! Boeing did make a speculative push for an OV-10(X) but that is just a paper aeroplane. There is no production facility and the availability the tooling is questionable. It would have to be redesigned and certified, a production facility would have to be set up…this would take years! The Afghans need these aircraft as soon as possible and the money to pay for them falls out of the US budget in 2013! The LAS contest also has a secondary requirement that the aircraft have a training capability. The OV-10 isn’t going to make the best trainer in comparison to the AT-6 or AT-29.
In the time frame and framework of the contest the only suitable solutions would be the AT-6, AT-29 or the PC-21 (which didn’t even bid). Yet people still insist on talking about fantasy air forces of OV-10 or Skyraiders…even IL-2:confused: come on guys this is silly. The contest is being relaunched Beechcraft have been let back in and the AT-29 still has a good chance of winning as it better suits the role.
FedaykinThe J-21 if it is in the format we are expecting will put Pakistans purchase of J-10 totally in doubt. The J-21 is stealthy and has an AESA also it looks like it will have the WS-13 engine which will give commonality with later JF-17 batches.
FedaykinYou could save money if you offered up the QE as a short term lease to the USN. Hybrid crew using personell from both navies. Jets and support aircraft from the US. Helps build UKs experience base. Saves buying an interim jet.
Actually the PoW will have to sail with a hybrid British, American and French crew. We need the experience of the USN and Aeronavale working up this kind of vessel. I’m fully expecting the loan of a CAG-BAT and other key personnel from both services…I could even see the first trap being a Rafale or Super Hornet flown be experienced American or French pilots. Certainly for the USN and Aeronavale personnel it will be an exciting experience helping the UK build up a new esprit de corps!
Fedaykin+1 Fedaykin
Go to agree with you there mate, that sounds more an overall review of the options rather than a switch back.
The BBC report mentions costs upto 1.2 billion to convert a CVF, but that was the figure quoted by Admiral Hussain at the select committee meeting last summer so thats not a drastic price increase and is built into the rise from 5 to 7 billion for the carriers. Its the aircraft that are providing the headaches now!
Its coming out now as they need to set the budget for decisions made next year, which is when they will have a clearer idea of the F-35C performance, issues and cost after the Arrestor hook has been tested again, Sea Trials on a CVN (If the hook fix does work and meets specifications) together with a better understanding on how the deferred USN orders will effect the bringing into service of the F-35C as a carrier aircraft and what impact that will have on the unit cost.
I could see any F35C procurement being pushed back to 2025, this would give time to the USN and Lock-Mart to de-risk the aircraft as well as fit around revised delivery schedules for the USN. The UK would still have the test aircraft to do trials work and UK F35 pilots would initially start flying with the USN. This would also dovetail with RAF Tornado GR4 retirement plans, the RAF would prefer to keep the Tornado to about 2025 with a graduated draw down of the type from about 2018 with Typhoon Tranche 3A taking up some of the slack. This would give the RAF a mixed fleet in 2025 of the F35C for day 1 kick down the door penetration strike and Typhoon Tranche 3A for swing-role strike ops.
Finally a short term lease of Rafale M or Super Hornet to bridge the gap until F35C, this has the added advantage of bringing down the upfront costs by inducting a mature type that UK pilots have already flown and allows time for the risk to be taken out of the F35C program. With the three F35 (two B and one C) the UK can carry on all that boring trials work without worrying about delays.
FedaykinThr Sea King AEW was too late to see combat on the Falklands. As for that BBC report I would say it is leaning towards ditching or pushing back F35 and an interim lease or purchase of a different aircraft being made. Going for Super Hornet or Rafale cuts significant cost and risk from the program and F35 can still be purchased at a later date. Problem is it would put a significant boot BAE Systems backside and might even cause the whole F35 program to crumble.
Again it has to be pointed out this is also based on Jim Murphy a labour mp doing a fair amount of stirring and ignoring the fact its a mess made by his previous government.
Sign In
