FedaykinUSAF, USN and USMC were all stuck with 1970s vintage jets (F-16, F-18, AV-8B) and realized it would take 15 years to develop a new design. But there wasn’t enough money in the defense budget to develop 3 different new jets. So they collaborated on a “joint” airplane that could be built in versions to satisfy the needs of each service.
Indeed they did have aircraft designed in the 1970’s albeit the bulk was procured in the 80’s but I will throw in a “but“! Frankly they had got into a rather strange cycle with the fighters they were procuring. They were literally buying new fighter aircraft and then sending them off to the boneyard at Davis Monthan with only 25% of their airframe life used up!
FedaykinHasn’t that Chinese order for IL76 fallen through now. Anyway the period of significant IL76 sales was serviced from unfinished white tails sitting outside the factory. Fresh production is another matter altogether.
FedaykinAh happy Chipmunk memories! My first ever flight was in a Chipmunk, as a young member of the ATC with the seat type parachute you really did feel like you were climbing into a Spitfire.
FedaykinWell the real question is would Rosboronexport even respond to the South Korean request to tender?
Do they regard it a worthwhile effort to tender their latest fighter to a country that is highly likely to chose the American product (my money is on the F35) when it comes to the crunch. To reply to the tender and then go through the selection process costs significant money and exposes the technology to a country and airforce with VERY close relations to the USAF.
For that matter would the Eurofighter consortium regard it as worth it considering what happened on earlier tenders and the fact that South Korea is clearly interested in a Stealth fighter.
FedaykinActually we would have had a hard time without the discrete help made by are allies during the Falklands conflict.
Whilst everybody goes on about Sidewinders and Satellite images the real big help the Americans gave us was not causing any issues over using Ascension Island for operations and re-tasking several naval refueling tankers to transfer fuel to the task force.
Chile gave intelligence and radar support.
The French helped block Exocet sales to Argentina and allowed dissimilar combat training with French types operated by Argentina.
FedaykinNo problem I respect your opinion Village idi.
But I would question the point you are making with this question:
In respect of deck handling and general operations how transferable are our prior skills with the Invincible class and Harrier to a CATOBAR QE class?
I would argue only limited. Even what HMS Siskin can do is limited in that respect in comparison to what can be done with personnel transfer with the USN and French navy. As Jonesy has pointed out in the past dropping F35B means we drop the knowledge base we have built.
The RN has no choice but to start sending chockheads abroad over the next few years to start building up the new skill sets. As for the bulk of the general crew for the first QE class to stand up my gut feeling it will come from Ocean as she stands down. As for the loss of corporate skill I understand what you are driving at but the deed has been and the RN will have to adapt to the situation, in effect:
The bed has been made now they will have to lie in it!
I totally understand that dropping carrier strike ten years early has caused massive almost insurmountable issues but I am more interested in examining how the navy will deal with it and make my own suggestions on how it could be done rather then go into a “woe is me – it can’t be done” funk that some people have got into.
So thats my opinion on the matter.
FedaykinIt won’t happen, we will do what the Argentines, Brazillians, French and Indians already do and feed pilots into the US training stream as required. (Actually that has already started.)
FedaykinAside from the obvious Catapult and Arresting gear engines what other systems are we going to have to buy off the Americans to start CATOBAR operations.
Certainly IFLOLS is at the top of the list, I presume something like the the AN/SPN-41A and AN/SPN-46 will be a must have and we will we need to buy the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) as well to support the F35C?
FedaykinI would suggest that basics are basics, regardless of whether the future is V/STOL or involves “Cats and traps”. Will there be exchanges for lots of chockheads – moving live jets on deck 24 hours a day in all weather in rough sea states, the people who fuel, arm and work on aircraft on deck – amongst jet blast (and FOD issues) the OOW and bridge team – who have to put the ship in the right place, direction and speed for aircraft to take off or land, Ops Room personnel – who have to operate sensors/weapons and talk to aircraft, maintainers of this equipment, landing aids maintainers, the ME watchkeepers keeping a nice level deck and increasing speed when needed, ATC types, Fighter Controllers, senior Officers in the carrier (Cdr(Air), Lt Cdr(Flying), Captain, XO) – they need to know how to run things, senior Officers elsewhere (MOD, Navy Command, task group commanders) who need to know how aircraft are used as task group weapons, etc?
To pick on that the second CATOBAR was selected in SDSR this was always going to be the case. In respect of deck handling there is not much shared between STOVL and CATOBAR operations. So it was always going to be the case that Chockheads and everybody else will have to train with the Americans and French. Considering there are 11 American and 1 French carrier around I think they will be able to find slots for our guys. Anyway we are talking about training enough personnel to support QE class levels of operations rather then an American Super carrier. It should also be noted that the Americans and French have been quite keen for the UK to restart CATOBAR operations. It should also be noted that when the first QE class works up for CATOBAR operations you will a lot of American and French personnel on board. Certainly it will be a prime exchange tour slot for any American or French serviceman. Actually I would put money on the first landing on a QE class will be conducted by an American or French LSO. I’m sure the Americans will be able to spare at least one “Cag Paddles”.
FedaykinSo we are all agreed that this is all a silly misunderstanding.:p
Now we can all be friends.
Fedaykinit was cost and getting parts for them that our pigs were retired and the fact that we are going for one type if fighter (F-35).the super hornets are a stop gap and will make it easier to transition to the F-35 when they arrive. though with the money spent on 14 F-35 i’d like to see what could have been done to f111’s. maybe F119 engines, new intake design Aesa radar, glass cockpit,replace pavetack with one like on the F-35,6 swivel hard points instead of 4 outer s to carry harms/aim9x, plus the bay carrying weapons again.
Thats effectively the Carlo Kopp solution and it is highly risky as well as expensive. Upgrading what are old airframes! What Australia did was far more sensible in buying Super Hornet which has AESA and a glass cockpit as well as a very comprhensive range of modern weapons. They also got new tankers that make up for the range difference.
FedaykinNot really, Pak-Fa and Typhoon are wild cards. I would say it is between F35 and F15 SE.
FedaykinThe JBD are really a no brainer, whilst Mactaggart Scott do offer a JBD design the simplest solution is to adopt the USN ones that are already being tested as stated in the article.
FedaykinFact is that the evolution of the J-7 to Super 7 and then JF-17 has kept little if anything of the J-7. But k, gg.
Yes I am bemused why some people are getting so upset and up tight over this subject considering the history of the JF-17 has been fairly reported.
Simply is a JF-17 just a Super 7?…no its very much a different aircraft. Does the JF-17 share an evolutionary history with the Super-7 and for that matter the J-7?…yes! That should hardly be seen as a negative thing or a slight on the Chinese or Pakistani aerospace industries.
A similar example would be the Mirage 2000 and Mirage 3. Is a Mirage 2000 just a Mirage 3?…no they are different aircraft. Does the Mirage 2000 share an evolutionary history from the Mirage 3?…Yes!
FedaykinWell I think the navy are playing the long game on this one, they managed to keep both carriers in production in SDSR. Now they are keeping things in play until after 2015 SDSR, they know its insane not to fit out both carriers for CATOBAR operations. Even it is a case of ensuring that one of the carriers is built with as much work done as possible to allow CAT and trap installation, machine spaces partially installed and the troughs and JDB ready – even if they are plated over then its a victory. It will take several years after 2020 to have properly working flight operations on one of the carriers, that leaves time to sneak funding for final system fit out on the second carrier in the latter half of that decade. The real mission of the RN is to ensure that they keep any potential buyers for the second carrier at arms length and away from the Treasury! I didn’t like it when ministers took the Brazilian defence minister to see QE construction!
Sign In
