FedaykinWell if they get rid of the three standard River class whilst retaining the still very new Clyde the operating budget issue goes away as the crew will transfer directly over.
Sadly retaining the River class in service is wishful thinking, the RN will take the new vessels into the role and the MOD will flog the Rivers off to whomever wants them. There are plenty of potential customers for those Rivers and I have no doubt that they will be shifted pretty quickly.
FedaykinThey certainly would be vulnerable against helicopter launched anti ship missiles, something the RN proved during GW1 when Lynx armed with Sea Skua hunted down Iraqi patrol boats.
But that isn’t a problem as the are intended for coastal patrol and fisheries protection, they will never be sent to that kind of threat environment. They do things like check fishing quotas or supporting the police against organised crime. Their system and weapons fit is entirely in keeping with their UK centric role and spending any money on high end defences against anti ship missiles is a waste.
Remember we got rid of the Peacock class that had an OTO 76 compact because we didn’t need that level of defences on a coastal patrol vessel anymore.
FedaykinSorry Freddy amusing theory but you are really barking up the wrong tree on this one. Iran was not making some strange threat against US ships with some kind of new WIG. Iran at no point has said this is a WIG, they have ONLY stated it is a stealth fighter and the thing we all saw Ahmadinejad look at is a rather bad mock up made out of Fibreglass. The cockpit is a joke with inappropriate avionics, it has no capacity for weapons and just one look at the optical quality of the canopy shows it up as a fake. You literally can’t see through that canopy! There is no reason to assume it performs the role you have talked yourself into believing.
FedaykinI have very good idea about UK but it does not mean it is profitable. infact UK has the most inefficient allocation of resources in World. JSF simply cannot be profitable for UK ( contrary to Vnod claim) consider opportunity cost. what does best ships mean any thing when your broke. infact with large budget/trade deficits hinder exports of fighter/ships/missile. as the customer country will think your not going to stand by them. see long BAE EF price negotiations with Saudis. This negotiations are now longer than Gorshkov saga.
Oh dear oh dear. I take it you are keen to show your lack of knowledge about economics, engineering and anything to do with the aerospace industry. My you do give us something to laugh about JSR…
So you are going to bring up the Gorshkov saga again are you. Lets see how many years late and over budget is it now. It still isn’t in Indian service and won’t be for a fair while yet.
Typhoon is in Saudi service, they actually flew some over recently to participate in an exercise. The issue of negotiating another batch doesn’t remove the fact that they are in Saudi service and the contract obligations have been met for the initial batches.
Please do give us more to laugh at you about.
:very_drunk:
Ahhhh the JSR ignorance drinking game it never gets boring
FedaykinReally you draw the conclusion the F313 is a WIG with that level of certainty?!
The Iranian’s have said nothing about it being a WIG, quite the opposite actually. Its configuration in particular stuff like the intake configuration is probably more down to the limitations of Glass Fibre and ducting to a small turbojet.
Fedaykinnow that janes has revealed the Koreans are basically going for a glorified F-16 variant with side intakes and faceted fueselage
I think you would of bowled me over if it had been any other configuration. It is an entirely logical step on from T-50 utilising what they have experienced with their F-16 work. What interests me is KFX exactly fills a market segment that the US is vacating when the F16 eventually finishes production, if they can keep the price figure close to an F-16 and below F-35 I can see some interested customers out there.
FedaykinThanks for the above, I’ve always understood your point but don’t agree. Unless the data shows that my thoughts are clearly inaccurate, in which case i shall have to revise my position with regard to the economic benefits.
In our initial exchanges on the subject you were pretty forceful in telling that that i should accept that F35 brought economic benefit, something i don’t believe at this time and will not simply accept without being shown data that supports the contention.
I’ll happily respect your position and opinion as long as you respect mine, which is to reject such an opinion when there is no data supporting it.
If the data supports it then clearly your position is correct and mine incorrect.
The other (more important in my view) element to our original discussion was whether the (disputed) economic benefits were of more or less importance and significance to the UK than the potential loss in capability resultant from a reduced number of combat aircraft in comparison to todays force.
Then frankly I am rather puzzled by your position and would say you are being a bit bloody minded about it all in the face of very clear evidence.
In our initial exchanges on the subject you were pretty forceful in telling that that i should accept that F35 brought economic benefit, something i don’t believe at this time and will not simply accept without being shown data that supports the contention.
Well lets come at it from another way as frankly I don’t understand your position, you explain how 3000 airframes all with significant UK content will be of no economic benefit to UK PLC. As Vnomad pointed out that even a conservative build number represents billions of pounds to the UK, now if your argument is a totally UK solution and no participation with F35 would of brought more economic benefit you are arguing a different thing. Would a UK only solution sell 3000+ airframes? The UK is currently involved with the F35 program, every single airframe built is a job protected and millions back to the UK even if there are no exports.
The other (more important in my view) element to our original discussion was whether the (disputed) economic benefits were of more or less importance and significance to the UK than the potential loss in capability resultant from a reduced number of combat aircraft in comparison to todays force.
That is a different argument from economic benefit, total UK fleet numbers in my opinion have been cut a bit too drastically but on the other hand the time of very narrowly defined types and roles are gone. Typhoon and F35 will do all the roles that were once performed by a number of types in the past with the latter also performing the at sea naval strike requirement. A discussion about loss of UK capability is interesting and I get what your saying that if we had not done F35 at all we might have had more in the kitty to buy an off the shelf type like Rafale but at the price of UK industry. 138 Rafale with virtually no benefit to UK industry or 3000+ F35 and significant benefit to the UK economy…its a no brainer to me.
I think you need to explain your position rather then say you will not accept that the UK will benefit. What data do you want? We know currently how many are planned to be built, we can extrapolate how much the UK financially gets back on each airframe, how is that not an economic and industrial benefit? Present your data and persuade me it is of no economic benefit.
FedaykinTwo very large Helicopter carriers and our Tornado GR4 replacement plans up the wazoo is what it would leave us. Typhoon would pick up some slack with T1 staying on longer, the curious issue for me is the 138 procurement number. Post 2010 SSDR that number was definately going to be cut but the government has been rather back tracking on that after Lock Mart pointed out that UK work share would be cut. Whilst that wouldn’t hurt RR or BAE Systems it would hurt small to medium UK suppliers with all the PR back lash, my gut feeling is 2015 SSDR will move towards a batch model of procuremnt and Typhoon T1 will probably go in favour of F35B. I see benefits in that, delaying batches to later production slots means cheaper better sorted airframes.
FedaykinIn my opinion there is factual inaccuracies or selectiveness in your comments as well. We are as far as I am concerned equal in that sin. I also think that some but not all of your comments lack substance just the same as you see of mine. I also see a fair amount of Pot Calling the Kettle Black in your commentary regarding the F35. The impression I get is you do show a fair amount of contempt to F35 supporters, I am an F35 supporter. I do not see why I should have my support of the F35 program be questioned with demands for “Data”. It is a matter of opinion not spreadsheets, my opinion is clouded no doubt by my relative proximity to UK F35 production facilities I concede but that is immaterial to my main issue. For example I support the Barcelona football team, in the same vein I don’t need to give you or anybody else “Data” to support that subjective opinion. I certainly don’t like being lumped into a group because if it.
To go back to a tired point my issue is still very much to do with your views on UK economic benefit which is what got up my nose in the first place, I am going to try and give some substance to my views then politely ask you to metaphorically shake hands on the matter and walk away from it.
UK procurement of F35 is currently projected at 138
Total projected international build is 3000 over that (using fuzzy math at the moment considering total build numbers are not set in stone currently)
That means to me UK PLC will benefit from making significant structures and sub systems for over 2862+ airframes, I see that as a good thing. The data in the statement is the number over the UK projected buy (ignoring the fact that the UK buy also benefits the UK through return on investment). Do you understand my point? Now if the F35 is cancelled or significantly less is purchased then the return to the UK will be reduced or taken to zero. Currently the F35 program is going ahead so I see economic benefits ahead and jobs being kept safe. Now I do understand your argument that the benefit financially and in R&D could of been greater of the UK had gone it alone like France but would a UK only development sell as much as F35 (or whatever the US had gone with) in the global market? Going on Typhoon export sales I would say no, we are better hanging on the coat-tails of the American program. Licence building Rafale might of saved some jobs in the UK but not given as much R&D benefit in comparison to what is on the table with F35. The financial and R&D benefit from the F35 program for UK PLC is worth the pain, that is my opinion (please don’t ask for data in respect to an opinion)all I ask is not to lump me in with any group or call me silly names because of that and just respect that is my position.
I am a fairly personable person all I am asking is to shake hands on that matter and move on rather then treat it as a zero sum game. You see factual inaccuracies in what I say…fine. I see the same in your comments, I am asking to leave it at that.
FedaykinI don’t need to spend time trying to find your mistakes or selective thinking if it supports your anti F35 agenda (how many times do I have to write “Pot Kettle Black”), you make it so easy. Surprise surprise yet again your selective thinking shines out for all of us to see. By the way my mistake 15 not 18, you see unlike you I am happy to admit when I mistake. Not really surprising for a member of the “Anti F35 Gang” (look at me I can be just as childish about people who don’t share my opinion – don’t worry I fully expect you to as usual fail to see the irony in that statement and start screaming “Strawman” or “Give me the Data”…
The F22 didn’t suffer from funding or political issues…reeeeeeallly. Come on just be gracious when you have been shown to be hoisted on your own petard. So other programs that have suffered delays or issues get a pass but the F35 a program that has been very public in its reporting can’t.
Look it is simple all modern fighter programs suffer from delays for myriad reasons add F35 to that list, picking F35 out as a unique or different situation is vaguely amusing but nothing more, Making excuses for other programs because it suits your anti F35 agenda is all very well but not really that useful.
Look you want me to play nice with you, it is simple. Stop being so rude! Stop calling me Feddy, stop stating that anybody who is supportive of the F35 is a member of the “F35 gang” ergo in some way or another dishonest or ignorant. You want grown up conversation, fine so do I! I am 34 year old man with a university education and my own set of opinions and views. I have no problem with you writing about the problems with the F35 program, but I am entitled to disagree with your views.You persist in telling me to read what you are saying properly and try to comprehend it, well I do and I have, the thing is I don’t agree with all you are stating. I am allowed to disagree with you? You accuse me of being sore with you, to a degree I am. I resent being treated with contempt purely because I do not share your views on this one single matter. You don’t like being attacked personally, you don’t like being called names…well stop doing it yourself! Try and treat other forum members like grown ups rather then calling them “Feddy” or “Hoppy”, then you will be treated with more respect in return. I have repeatedly said on this forum that I am a civilian amateur with my own opinions and failings, I don’t know you from Adam so why should I just accept your views as the accepted wisdom? I have asked to live and let live, can you grow up and just let it be?
Now that is a fairly long rant, I am asking you Snafu352 to take a step back for a moment and consider that this is an open forum with different views and opinions. I am happy to treat you with curtsey and respect as befitting any other adult I would deal with in my personal and work life. Why don’t you just stick to criticism of the F35 program, I have no problem with that. The issue I have is your treatment of other forum members calling me “Feddy” for example or lumping any supporter of the program into some nefarious and slightly ignorant “F35 gang” as you so call it. That way we can all go about our lives easier. Truce? Is it that hard?
FedaykinYour point being? Show me a modern fighter program that doesn’t take years from first flight to initial operating capability.
Typhoon: 9 years from first flight for IOC
Rafale: 15 years from first flight IOC
F22: 18 years from first flight to IOC
So clearly time frame is apparently relevant when it suits you but to be ignored when it does not.
Please do try harder Snaffy
FedaykinWell, maybe Japan would accept to pay part of the cost to re-open the F-22 Production Line. With a modest Japanese content for F-22J’s purchased for the JASDF.
It is not just the issue of cost, the production line has been crated and mothballed the suppliers have moved on. The suppliers have closed down their F22 production facilities and the skilled workers moved to other projects, laid off or retired. Some suppliers have moved out of the aerospace business altogether! Relaunching F22 production would involve finding new suppliers for now out of production components, those components also reflect the state of the art in the 1980’s and 90’s rather then now. A chip or module that is out of production can’t just be replaced with a newer example as it has to be integrated with other systems in the aircraft often meaning down-stream redesigns as well. It would also involve training a new workforce as you can’t guarantee the old one coming back and even those who could be persuaded have suffered skill fade. Each month that passes since the closing down of F22 production increases the cost and difficulty of relaunching almost to the point you would be better of designing a new fighter.
FedaykinNO NO NO (not in the last place because Brahmos is close to 8m long and weighing in at around 2,5 tons, versus less than 6m and (much) less than 1 ton for Harpoon. Incidentally, the P-8 will have 3 rotary launchers …. for sonobuoys (which can be manhandled).
See pic: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7093802-0-large.jpg
[ATTACH=CONFIG]222319[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]222320[/ATTACH]
Which further raises the question is Brahmos to heavy for the wing stations as well.
FedaykinOK buoys were terrible… As i told in another topic, while it took 2 hours to find a submarine during a competition in SE asia, Atlatique 2 found it in 10 mins…
Ah well that does make sense, then again overhauled P-3C are a fairly solid choice for any nation aspiring to gain the capability and as an FMS you also get access to all the USN training and support introducing them into service. Also there are newer generation Sonar buoys (thanks there Bager1968) that can be procured which can be launched from the P-3C. Logically Vietnam would take a job lot of the older (slightly cr@ppy) buoys from USN stocks to get started then move over to a later more advanced model once they are established with the type. The USN are currently renewing their Sonar buoys with updated variants so prior performance might not count.
FedaykinSonobuoys (sonar buoys).
Hah my ability to spell proper like failed in the face of a silly statement on the internets 😉
Sign In
