When I look at the AV-8B+ I think about what the Sea Harrier FA2 could of been.

If it had been based on the Harrier II airframe rather then a belts and braces upgrade of the old FRS1 we could of got a far more capable type that was easier to upgrade and logistically closer to the GR5. Also there would of been a fair chance of a sale to Italy rather then AV-8B+ that they purchased in the end.

Finally it would of probably still be in service now.

Shame…

In retrospect India would of been better off going out to tender for a new carrier altogether. It would of been cheaper, built quicker and have better optimised layout to their needs.

At the rate the IN will get the home built carrier (Vikrant isn’t it?) before Vikramaditya.

Classic case of all overbudget and overtime defense project where too much money and time has been spent to cancel but an embarrasing amount has to be spent to move on. Actual just like the RAF’s Chinook HC3 purchase!

Part of the problem is that the F-35B looked really attractive to the RAF (less so to the RN right from the start, unless carrier size got cut) as a Harrier replacement. It was particularly attractive because it clearly was a Harrier replacement, thus leaving the Tornado GR-4 replacement to the FOAS project, i.e. more aircraft. Now that FOAS is canned, the F-35 is realistically going to have to serve as the GR-4 replacement, so F-35C is looking more and more attractive. For the Navy, the -C was always more attractive, in part because it meant a more flexible carrier (Hawkeye, UAVs etc all being much easier on CTOL carriers).

In a sense, it is just a matter of commitment – if F-136 were canned, but the UK goes ahead with F-35 procurement, CTOL becomes more attractive. Mind you, there were rumours that the RN really liked the V-22 Osprey that was being demonstrated on Lusty a few months back…

The RN also really liked the E2000 Hawkeye they looked at a few years back at the Farnborough airshow, it met all their AEW replacement needs and I think it was also what kicked off the RN’s look at CTOL operations again.

So the Pumas have to wait another 7 or 8 months for someone to decide that yes they can be upgraded or no it’ll be cheaper to buy new.

Then there will be several months of political debate before a contract is actually signed either for new or rebuilds

Then there is the lead time before work starts on the first helicopter, with the final one being several more years down the line.

Why wasn’t this process started years ago !!!

Oh yeah and for the upgrading process to be cost effective, 4 or 5 Pumas need to be withdrawn from active service and worked on at the same time….all this without any sign of replacement/fill in helicopters.

The process was started many years ago (mid 80’s) and then cancelled by the then Tory government. Westland had gained the rights to build the S70 Blackhawk to form part Al Yamarah and as a possible replacement for the Puma (there was an MOD replacement program for the Puma at the time). The helicopters were dropped from Al Yamamah when a scandal kicked off over bribes in relation to Westland. The UK MOD gov then decided to drop the puma replacement program and the rest is history.

The RAF could of been operating Blackhawks right now rather then trying to keep an ever aging fleet of Pumas aloft.

If NH industries would care to bring up some downgraded cheaper variant of their flying marvel on the market, that could be a nearly ideal solution for RAF.

I don’t think the price could be driven down enough for the UK. Also little chance of UK final assembly.

The gazelle needs replacing, as will lynx in the near future.

I recall the MoD opted for a ‘future lynx’ design to replace the existing ones, which sounds to me like an awful get-out.

imho, the UK should use the Merlin to totally replace Sea King and Puma, 1 for 1, or even more, given the current shortfall in helos. Will it happen, No, will we get a lot of a$$ covering political double-speak from the govt? Yes.

The things is whilst the Merlin is a good Sea King replacement it really is too big to be a good Puma replacement.

Considering the Puma was going to be replaced from the early 90’s by the Westland/Sikorsky Blackhawk it’s no surprise we are in such a dire situation with that platform now.

I think that the AW.149 was a very calculated move by Augusta Westland, its clearly a suitable replacement for the Puma in the same class, final assembly is slated for the UK and it’s based on existing technology which should keep the risks and costs down. I think they are expecting an order down the line as a Puma replacement possibly attached with a stupid PFI for the SAR replacement program.

The one item that immediately comes to mind as being the most impressive piece of engineering and manufacturing on the Tomcat is its titanium wing box. There’s film out there of one being manufactured that is simply incredible (I wish I could locate it). If cloned and mutated F-5s are proving a decades manufacturing challenge to the Iranians, a reverse engineered version of the Tomcat’s wingbox would certainly top that.

I would love to know what became of the wing box to Tomcat No.1 that Grumman kept as a test article after recovering it from the crash of the first prototype. It would be an ideal addition to the Cradle of Aviation Museum at Mitchel Field (where the oldest remaining Tomcat, No. 3, resides.)

Its amazing how the “can Iran make new Tomcat” subject comes up every once in a while! I posted on a thread on this forum last year about exactly the same thing.

Your right about the Titanium pivot box Boxman, very much a show stopper when it comes to reverse engineering the Tomcat.

I don’t often get a chance to quote myself but here is a copy of the post I made last year about this very subject:

I had to dig out Mike Spick’s excellent book ‘Modern Warplanes’ before I composed this answer. Firstly here is a quote from the book:

…One of the obvious applications of titanium in a variable sweep wing aeroplane is the wing carry-through box, which holds the pivots. This is inevitably a large and heavy structure which needs great strength to carry the in-flight loads. The corresponding item in the F-111 had been made of steel, part welded and part bolted together. Bolting is an excellent way of connecting things, but it does introduce discontinuities, as the stresses and strains are taken by the bolt holes. Suffice it to say that the F-111 experianced a few problems with its wing box assembly, and to avoid this, Grumman elected not only to manufacture the structure from titanium, but to produce an all-welded assembly. So large a component had never before been made from titanium, but the rewards, in the form of a 900lb (408Kg) weight saving over the same product in steel, was great. The weight reduction also reduced the fuel load needed to meet mission requirements.

The wing box assembly was a large structure, 22ft (6.71m) long, made up of 35 sub assemblies, which had to be carefully aligned before being placed in a vacuum chamber for electron-beam (EB) welding. For the production of the F-14, Grumman invested heavily in EB welding machines, five in all, including two of the biggest in the Western world. The largest was 32ft x 10ft (9.76m x 3.05m) and was capable of welding titanium wing planks 26ft (7.93m) long, while the machine used to weld the wing carry-through boxes measured 25ft x 11ft x 9ft (7.62m x 3.35m x 2.74m). The vacuum chamber is necessary to maintain the high energy levels needed (60,000 volts), and to prevent atmospheric contamination of the weld. With the components in position, the chamber is evacuated, and the machine operator uses a telescope to track the thin seam line of the joint.

Seventy welds are needed on each wing box assembly, and the machine is capable of operating at speeds of up to 60in (152.4cm) per minute. The energy of the electron beam is focussed on a spot roughly 1/8in (3mm) wide, and can penetrate up to 2.5in (63.5mm) of titanium at a single pass. The resulting weld is very narrow, very strong, causes hardly any distortion, and needs little cleaning up on completion. The F-14 had its share of problems, but the wing box was not one of them. So strong is it, that following the crash of the first prototype, the component was recovered intact from the wreck and put to use as a test fixture….

Considering all this you should start to see the issue for Iran if it tried to put a reverse engineered version of the F-14 into production. Including the wing box 25% of an F-14s structure is titanium to save weight and add strength. Irans aero structures industry is unlikely to have the capability to build major titanium structures and for that matter equivalents in steel. If they did produce Steel equivalents they would be too heavy and understrength for use in the F-14 (which should anwser your suggestion PLA-MkII).

Iran can more than likely canablise major structures from stored airframes to keep the rest in service and any new structure construction is probably limited to aluminium or simple steel.