Also what Cunard wants is hardly anything radical! Effectively all their ships for the last twenty to thirty plus years have been an evolution of design and build concepts common in the cruise ship industry.

On that note I do feel it was a disaster British shipyards missing the Cruise ship boom of the eighties, nineties and naughties. Then again govenment after government failed to support and invest in the modernisation British yards needed to compete in that sector! If key British yards had been churning out Cruise liners for the last thirty years it would of made the millitary ships far cheaper to build. In effect the large proportion of the workforce would focus on bog standard steel bashing for cruise liners whilst a nascent small corp of workers could of been retained with the more advanced skills for millitary shipbuilding.

The delays in the design and construction of the CVFs IS indefensible. Cunard needed world beating ships built on time and budget so that they could put them in service and start reaping the rewards. Why shouldn’t the same criteria apply to a military project such as the CVF? A year is too short obviously but 20+ years is a disgrace for the UK.

Much of the delays with CVF are down to government prevaricating rather then an inability of British industry to design and construct the ships.

The design and prime contractor was chosen January 2003, even with the messing about forming the carrier alliance Main gate was expected within months of that decision. Instead the Labour government put it off with an extended assesment phase then deselected the prime contractor before putting things off further with a two stage main gate and further negotiations to reform the carrier alliance. The second stage of main gate was then missed again though government prevaricating. Finally main gate was approved in 2008 when Gordon Brown got jumpy about jobs in his constituency.

Without all the messing about main gate could easily of been in 2004-5 with both carriers easily into build now, actually QE would be entering into final fitting out by now!

It wasn’t just French AF Mirage interceptors that bested Sea Harriers during ACM practice. RNZAF A-4 Skyhawks also killed many Sea Harriers with missiles during a 1992 training exercise in the South Pacific. There was a big difference in technical capability of the Skyhawks used by Argentina and New Zealand. The Kiwi A-4 was of later manufacture, upgraded with HOTAS cockpit, improved avionics, more powerful engine, far superior APG-66 radar, and armed with the AIM-9L Sidewinder missile.

Argentina had been embargoed by the U.K. and U.S. long before the Falklands war, cutting them off from technical support, upgrades and spare parts for aircraft and weapons sold to them earlier. There is no doubt that if the Argentina’s air forces had the latest bombs, missiles, radars and fire control systems (like those issued to frontline American, French and Israeli pilots) the British invasion fleet probably would have withdrawn from the Falklands after several days. They could barely withstand the pounding they received anyway, despite all of the dud bombs and missiles that hit British shipping.

It was in the sense that the British pilots had them and the Argentine pilots did not. Even your Prime Minister was able to recognize that technological advances in weapon systems was more significant than any difference in the airframe that fired them.

Much is made of the importance of AIM9L Sidewinder and its effect on the campaign also it has been pointed out that the Sea Harrier has been bested more then once in DACT. This ignores that the critical decider which was FUEL!

The Argentine airforce and navy concentrated on bombing the taskforce over anything else. Argentine fighter bombers were at the maximum edge of their unrefueled range. When RN Sea Harriers faced other types like the Australian Mirage 3 in DACT they were not operating within their optimum flight range. Sea Harrier is a subsonic type and with its small wing needs to operate fairly low down to get the most out of it. The Mirage with its nice big delta wing likes to operate high and fast. At high altitude the Sea Harrier can’t hope to turn with or keep up with a Mirage 3.

Now during the Falklands campaign Argentine fighter bombers had to fly an economic subsonic flight profile to reach the task force then descend down to low level to bomb the ships. Right into the optimum flight regime of the Sea Harrier, who can then manoeuvre to the optimum tail shot location for AIM-9G (the weapon they had trained for). The most that can be said for AIM9L is it was more likely to hit the target then the AIM9G.

Many experts around the world have stated the best solution for Argentina was to extend the runway at Port Stanley to allow jet operations off the Island. Failing that many fighter pilots including FAA and RAF ones have stated that the Argentines should of thrown everything they had against the Sea Harriers regardless of the losses as they could of sustained the attrition far better then the UK. Instead they concentrated on bombing allowing the UK air dominiance over the Islands, with the Sea Harriers gone the Argentines could of concentrated far better on the ships of the task force.

Finnish Air Force decommissioning 41 Hawk trainer jets

Most of Finland’s fleet of British-built Hawk trainer jets are to be decommissioned over the next four years. The Finnish Air Force is getting rid of 41 of the 67 two-seat Hawks in its arsenal.
Ten of the planes have already been grounded, due to metal fatigue in the bodies and wings of the aircraft.

…In the next 5-7 years the Air Force will also have to replace its fleet of Vinka propeller planes, which are the training aircraft it has used for beginning pilots.
The Air Force has outsourced the Vinka pilot training to Patria, which takes place at the Luonetjärvi base north of Jyväskylä.

Full Story

Well depending on fatigue life and corrosion at least some of those Hawk will be very attractive. The Patria overhaul and cockpit upgrade appears to be very good.

The thing is Sharkey Ward has rubbed a great many people up the wrong way over the years including fellow members of the Fleet Air Arm. He has a reputation as an arch b*ll 5h1tter amongst his peers.

Not really, its going to take time to induct the J-10. New and upgraded F16 can be added into the fleet extremely quickly.

Induction of AMRAAM onto the F16 fleet is also a significant capability improvement for Pakistan as well.

Well its a solution that could work, if it will turn out that way well my crystal ball doesn’t see that far at the moment.

The ships are being built so at this moment in time I would rather be optimistic that a fixed wing capability will return to the navy.