LordJimmaybe I should Clarify what I was saying. If the USN does not go with the F-35 at all, both the C and B variants are off the table meaning the RN would have to look for another platform. The RAF however could still purchase the A variant to maintain it’s two platform plan for it’s fast jet fleet. Yes this is another what if but given the squeeze that is going to be put on the DoD the Navy may decide as has been rumoured that it cannot afford the F-35C and maintain aircraft numbers and so decide to go with the F-18 until the next gen platform and/or UCAVs are available. The F-35B would probably actually be the most vulnerable of the three in this what if.
LordJimFirst we are not retiring the Starsreak to my knowlegde just the Stormer.
Now back on topic. I fully agree that the C2 should be the priority for the RN and having rammed through the CVF I do not think they will win many friends if they now stand on their soap box and start demanding a High End escort.
The C2 needs to be a general purpose patrol vessel of frigate dimensions. It need a GP main gun but no bigger than 76mm, be able to operate a rotary platform up to the size of a Merlin, carry 2-4 RHIBs and 2-4 close defence weapons of 7.62 or 12.7mm. I would like it to have a system like RAM as well along with passive defence systems, though a modular CAAM system for which ot was fitted for but not with would probably be used.
In an ideal would though I would like C1 and C2 combined with the design being the ultimate “Fitted For Not With” platform with “Plug and Play” capability. This would mean the core would be very much as above and these would be the inital units launched (6-8), but later ones (6-8) could either be built fully equipped, or simply a number of weapon and electronic “Plug and Play”, systems purchased over time which would be pooled amongst the fleet, with their number increased or systems replaced as funding and technology permits and requirements change. So fully equipped they could have a combination up to 48 CAAM, a towed array, ASW Torpedos, a CIWS, ASMs, additional RHIBs and Troop compliment, and ultimately a long range land attack system )Probably in a box launcher like the USNs TLAM on the Spruance class destroyers and the retired BBs.
I see this a a generation ahead of the Absalon in that the system would be designed to be carried by the Next Gen RFAs to allow replacement etc on station, reducing the need to return home and hence increase availability and flexibility, with units on duty stations not needing to be fully kitted out but able to be so rapidly if the threat level increases and or redeployed to other stations.
LordJimA comparison of the RAAF Tanker programme and the MoD’s Tanker PFI is quite interesting, and quite obvious who is getting the better value for money. The former are getting 5 fully owned KC-30A with support for £1Bn. We are getting 12 of which we could operate as few as 5 full time for £13Bn including support over 27 years. Knowing how the MoD handles its contracts the PFI should have enough holes to drive a carrier through, and the track record for PFIs with regards to charges for anything not written into the contract makes things worse.
I say scrap the PFI and order 12 KC-30As and 8 C-30As (Transport only) to give the RAF a common fleet replacing the VC-10 and Tristar and also taking some of the workload off the C-17 for long distant operations.
LordJim£13 million can easily be written off so I would not hold that up as meaning the “B” variant is still on for the carriers. Whether we get the F-35 at all now really depends on just how much the USN wants it. If Gates does have his way in reducing the US Defence Budget, I agree the “B” variant is the most vulnerable and the USN may decide to buy yet more F-18E/F/G as they appear to be more than happy with it. Now the real question is how much they actually want the “C variant. So;
How much life have do the F-18C/D have left in them?
How soon could a UCAV be deployed on US Carriers?
What is the time scale for the next gen platform the USN is looking for? Could they decide to go with an all F-18 fleet until either of both a UCAV and next gen platform are available?
All of the above would have a major impact on what platforms are available to the UK to equip the QE and PoW. Could this allow a buy of the Cheaper “A” variant for the RAF around 2015, say initially for 2-3 squadrons including the OCU, whilst the FAA order their platform around 2020, keeping the Harrier force around until then by whatever means possible?
LordJimWith alot of our capabilities we are going to have to pair down capacity and rationalze. We are not currently using a helicopter in the Medium class on operations. The Army repeatedly state that they would like to own and operate Blackhawks, but I have to ask is this really about having assets under their control as thay are tired of requesting RAF helicopter and finding them away on other tasks. If the RAF has sufficient helicopters to actually meet the Army’s need would the Blackhawk campaign continue.
The way the UK operates its helicopters is more like the US Marines than the US Army. We use our Lynx AH in a similar way to their use of the UH-1. However the Merlin has many advantages over smaller helicopters arbeit at a higher cost.
At present the AH-9 is doing a good job and will do so until after 2015. The Wildcat is too small for the Army’s need and I feel it has only been ordered as that is all that was on the table. Surely it better to initially rationalize and update the UK’s main helicopter lift force, namely the Merlin and Chinook with the Wildcat purchased for the Navy, then after 2015 reexamine the need for both Medium and Light platforms without the bias brought on by operations in Afghanistan.
LordJimI must admit I was assuming the Merlin was cheaper then the current Chinook variant and was also using the money from not upgrading the Puma, buying the Wildcat for the army and retiring legacy platforms immediately.
LordJimCurrent plans are to pack everything including the kitchen sink when deploying and hope that nothing is left behind that cannot be bought whilst away. How many pairs of shoes are aircrew allowed to take!
LordJimI am going to have to type slower!
LordJimI think they need to rip up all current Helicopter plans, sit down and come up with a proper, cohesive programme. The Puma upgrade makes little sence, The knee jerk order for Chinooks will not deliver in time for Afghanistan and the Wildcat (army variant) fills a role the is historical rather than needed. The UK has always operated mainly medium/heavy helicopters in the ransport role and its doctrine does not follow that of nations like the US.
The Naval Wildcat does has a role to play especially if the Navy begins to operate lighter vessels, and is ideal for litorial operations, so the order for these should be retained.
For transport, the RAF should only purchase atrition replacements for the Chinook now but make sure the upgrade programme is fully funded to bring existing platforms up to the same standard. The RAF should retain its Merlins with minimum work carried out to make them available to operate for naval platfroms if a surge is required. Around 20 new Merlins built specifically for the RN should be purchased with polding rotor and tails with between 4-6 additional platforms pruchased if chosed for MASC.
the Lynx AH-7, Gazelle and Puma should all be finally retired over the next 3-4 years, with the Lynx AH-9A further modified for SF duties if the need exists. The Sea King HC4 should be able to be retired before 2015 as well if an order for the additional Merlins is placed promptly. This will mean the AAC is reduced by almost 50% and the RAF helicopter force by about 15%.
If after 2015 and the withdrawl from Afghanistan there is a need for a Medium Helicopter then a programme should be initiated, or additional buy of Merlin or Chinook. I have not listed a light/Utility platform as I believe its recce role is carried out by UAVs nowadays and the AH-9A with upgraded avionics could fullfil this role in the immediate future if neccessary. again if this capability is needed post 20105 and Afghanistan then it should be revisited.
LordJimIf we look at RAF requirements, the A400 is needed urgently to maintain our airlift capacity. The C-130 have been run into the ground and the C-17, whilst a fine aircraft is overkill for many tasks. An area of interest is the A330 MRTT fleet the RAF is due to start recieving next year. Would it make sense to suppliment these with 6-8 A330 Passenger/freighter variants? With the support structure in place for the tankers surely it would be a cost effective solution to increase the RAF’s airlift capacity without adding a forth type to its inventory
LordJimWhatever the result of the SDSR we are all, including the Government going to have to live with it. I Definitely do not like what appears to be on the cards but I am more concerned about how the Government is going to conduct its foreign policy, especially f they still believe thay can carry out operations as they do now. If they try to it will highlight how they disregarded the Strategic part of the review and all the spin in the world will not cover it up.
We will have to wait another five years to see if the Governemnts gamble paid off and if event have justified any increase in funding or even if their seems to be a case for further cuts.
Unless the UK is directly threatened there will never be a strong public support for defence spending, and as has been pointed out repeatedly average Joe’s understanding of defence is basic to say the least, and they will never understand the pro and cons of long term planning and procurement.
Mind you this forum is a good place to have a rant and get things of one’s chest so to speak.
LordJimWith the SDSR, the Armed Forces are going to take a huge hit unless the PM shifts his support publically from George Osborne to Liam Fox. Remember even if the cuts insisted by the Treasury are only 10%, the MoD has to find an additional 10% in order to deal with the existing hole in its finances so that would be an immidiate reduction of 20% and an additional 10% loss against each years budget for the next nine years.
Even if the Trident replacement is deferred until after 2015 if it still has to come form the core budget things are going to get worse. Basically there will be a net reduction in the Defence Budget year on year for the next 10 years if the MoD escaped any cuts in this SDSR.
I know this sounds very pessimistic but these are the sums and unless the Treasury opens up its Piggy Bank and pumps more money into the MoD the cuts from the 2010 are just the start. Liam Fox had it right when he decribed to predicted cuts as “Draconian”!
LordJimWell at least this letter has blown the lid of the spin that the SDSR is anything but a round of spending cuts as demanded by the Treasury with no real attention given to the UK’s strategic or domestic security needs. Now we just need the Government to actually come clean in public.
Using spin and mislleading the public should be made a capital crime but then again we would need to find replacement for at least 80% of the MPs, Special Advisors and Civil Servants. Whould that be a bad thing?
LordJimOk I have said my piece would those who seem to have the knowledge to predict what the SDSR will bring please put pen to paper and say where they think the immediate savings of 4-6 billion counting the need for 4% cuts demanded by the treasury and to start filling the £37Bn hole in current programmes, can be made. I keeo reading that this couldn’t happen or this would be stupid when people put forward suggeations so I would be very interested to hear their suggestions.
LordJimOk, regarding the MRA4, is this an esstential capability? If so is 9 airframes enough capacity to maintain it? Is it going to be used more as an ISTAR platform than for ASW/MP
I think in the current climate it is too much for the job and we can do without the capability as we are no longer the guardians of the Greenland Iceland UK gap and haven’t been for quite a while. If thing change in 10 or so years then we may have to look at such a platform but until then it would be 10 or so years of not paying operating costs etc.
Regarding a lower end MPA, I think this, together with SAR helicopters should no longer be the Military’s responsibility and handed over to another Government Department, again making savings for the MoD budget.
I knew C3 was on the back burner I didn’t realise it was dead, but that does add support fo a Son of a marriage of C2 and C3 with the Hull being the basis for support vessels as well as light frigates, hopefully with “Plug and Play” features to maximise their flexibility. In fact if the concept is evolved from the Danish model, would it be possible for the future RFS vessels to b e designed with this in mind and allow re-rolling to be done on station or in theatre?
Sign In
