An interesting report about the logistic impact of QE class and Type-26 on Portsmouth in particular shore based power requirements!

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/defence/a-new-blueprint-for-the-home-of-the-navy-1-5176331

Three of seven Typhoon operators? Only UK and Italy are going for F-35.

Spain and Germany have not signed up for F-35. Spain’s future is highly uncertain with depression level unemployment.

Typhoon export customers also are either not interested in F-35 (Austria) or are not authorised it due to Israeli concerns (Oman and Saudi Arabia).

Though I do agree with your other points.

Truth is Europe didn’t have anything close to F-16 to offer poorer/smaller countries in 1970s and 1980s* hence continued proliferation of US aircraft in European service. F/A-18 sales were also influenced by lack of comparable European products (as most of them were delayed).

*Viggen was non-NATO standard and with export restrictions, while Mirage F1 was too limited (though still sold to Spain and Greece). Mirage 2000 was too expensive.

To be fair if Spain wants to stay in the carrier business when they retire the AV8B the only choice they have is F-35B, nothing else is compatible with the Juan Carlos! The Spanish have made some noises that the F-35B is on the cards down the line. Here is an quote from a Jane’s article a few years back:

Admiral Rebollo told Jane’s that the aircraft vertical takeoff Harrier II Plus AV8B need to be replaced in the long term and currently the only option is the Joint Strike Fighter (F-35B) Martin Locher. “In this sense – AJEMA said,” the Spanish Navy has begun feasibility studies and risk analysis to enable our integration into the program in the early stages of production.

My guess is they will be one of if not the last operators of the Harrier. Let the US, UK and possibly Italy do the expensive job of working up the type for carrier operations then buy a batch in the mid 2020’s when the type is in full scale production and cheaper then go for early LRIP examples! If they have a sense they should look to embed some of the pilots with the USMC and FAA/RAF when they start ship integration of the type. There is also some sense for them to time their procurement with Italy’s buying a larger batch to a common block giving greater cost savings for both countries.

Aft Island on its way:

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/first-sea-voyage-hms-queen-1956897

But it is not about pallets Cherry Ripe, the C17 can haul outsize cargo into austere airfields globally without need for significant local ground facilities. A C17 can operate from a runway 90ft wide and 3500ft long, try that in a heavily laden 767 :p During Operation Joint Endeavor the ability of the C17 to fly into Tulza Air Base without support and back itself up on the runway was a significant plus for the aircraft.

In respect of Boom on RAF Voyager the MOD didn’t want to pay for the dedicated training stream to allow for its operation, personally I don’t agree with that decision and when I spoke to a pilot from 56(R)Squadron last year he was clear that it would of been nice of the MOD had talked to them over the matter. Nevertheless the lack of boom on RAF Voyager is to avoid the training and maintenance costs rather then the procurement cost.

Given the choice between adding boom to Voyager or getting the removable HDU and Wing pods for the A400M Atlas and the latter is the obvious choice. In the end only three RAF types can tank off the boom: C17, Sentry AEW1 and RC-135W/Airseeker. Of those three only one does it at the moment: Sentry AEW1 using allied assets. C17 frankly doesn’t need it within the operational profile we use it and presumably RC-135W/Airseeker will use the boom as we are taking US spec airframes and there is an operational logic in retaining the capability. Putting the removable HDU and wing pods of A400M would solve many problems making up for the shortfall in Voyager availability, allow tanking of Merlin Helicopters (and possibly Chinook) and be a more suitable platform for operation out of MPA. The barrier apparently is the contract with AirTanker Services giving exclusivity regardless of operational effectiveness.

The PFI deal for Voyager is arguably one of the greatest blunders foisted on our military in the last thirty years!

Personally I want the MOD to renegotiate the deal with AirTanker Darth Vader style!

What do use parachute regiment? C130J?

Well don’t laugh but I believe in recent years the Paras have been forced to use the Britten Norman Islander as there only platform for qualifying their men in parachute operations. The C-130 have been solidly tasked supporting Afghanistan and for that matter I am not even sure if they ever did clear the Juliet for that tasking. Recent reports have said that only eighty men are actually cleared for drops.

Wow that is something I did not know! Found some info on C130hercules.net about them, apparently they were maintained for several years in the hope of completing the order if the embargo was lifted. Eventually they gave up and they were pushed to a quiet part of the base and left to the elements! They are now suffering serious corrosion and in no condition to be returned to service. What surprises me is why were they not transferred to AMARG, pressed into US service or sold onto to a different nation! They can be found on Google Earth on the South Side of Dobbins ARB in two groups of four:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]217554[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]217555[/ATTACH]

Ironically in respect of COIN aircraft they have that issue nicely sorted. The Pucura upgrade is ongoing, new engines and updated avionics.