Well first off teh Uk needs a platform for the CVF so step forward the F-18E/F though I would buy the F only for more flexibility. As a platform it ticks all the boxes for a capable non-stealth CTOL platform. IT has good range and the ability to buddy refuel t extend operations. IT is a combat proven design and yet has plenty of growth potential in many area including reduced RCS. Nowadays integrating ordonnance on to a platform is not a complicated process and I am sure Boeing would do a good deal on any work requested and some items like Meteop might interest the USN.

I am not going to go down the micro scrutiny path that obsesses many when talking about the F-35 and its rivals but simply mention that the F-18 is a low risk, early delivery and until proven otherwise, cheaper option that can do what the UK needs.

Personally, rather than look to a replacement for Ocean I would like to see additional Merlin HC3 adapted to shipboard use being purchaced to ensure we have suficient platforms to be able to carry out an insertion by helicopter in an efffective manner. A CVF carrying 12 F18Fs, 3 E-2Ds and 24 Merlin HC3s and say 6 WAH-64Ds(marinised) would be a pretty good power projection / intervention platform.

I am glad that rumours seem to be rienforcing my view that if the SDSR is to concentrate on the need and cost of capabilities that STOVL and Stealth are not on the essential or need to have now catagory. Given the high profile the CVFs and their role in future plans, the FAA is going to have a much higher priority for nre platfoms than the RAF. The squadrons operating off the CVFs are in all probability going to be all Dark Blue with exchange pilots for the RAF rather than a joint force. Look for the MoDs version of Top Gun to be released in the next few years to try to increase the numbers or aircrew.

Seeing 3 to 4 operational and an OCU of F18s in FAA colours will be very god for the UK. We will have a platform with state of the art capabilities and given the plans in the pipline at Boeing it will have considerable growth potential.

My one nagging concern id that it is repeatedly reported in the media that the RAF has agreed to stick to the plan worked out with the previoous Government that it will only maintain a fleets of 4 frontline plus an OCU for the Typhoon fleet. If that is the case then it really has to retain at least half of the Tornado fleet at one base to maintain a viable overall fleet. With that the early retirement of the Harrier becomes a possibility, with a Cadre of RN pilots being seconded to the USN/USMC to maintain their skill sts and learn additional ones to prepare for the future. This could also mean that all but one of thee current CVLs could go much earlier with the single remaining platform operated as a replacement for Ocean until the CVFs come on stream.

Would anybody be in the market for 2 CVLs and 2 LSDs I wonder? The harrier scould also be part of a package as could the Sea Kink Mk7s if the FAA could lease 3 to 4 Hawkeyes form the US or buy surplus airframes from a country like Singapore which is replacing their and have them refurbished to E-2D specs.

I can only see the FAA ordering a maximum of 60 airframes for 2 operational and 1 conversion unit each of around 16 aircraft. The remained would be attrition reserves etc.

Going off topic but the Typhoon order has always concerned me especially the amount of reserve airframes. The original plane for 7 frontline and 1 OCU totalled around 120 airframes with the same number in reserve. I know a certain number of reserve airframes are needed but this always seemed alot more than neccessary. Could this be one area where savings are made reducing this figure and revising the practice. It will increase the usage of hours on platforms but with the current squeeze can we cope with that for the Typhoon and FAA platform what ever it is?

The UK’s Fast Jet force has already been decimated since 1991 with the draw down of RAFG, the early retirement of the SHAR and the continued reductions in the Tornado F3 fleet. The way things are going we are going to end up with 3-4 Dark Blue FJ squadrons and possibly up to 7 Light Blue units. That leaves a requirement for only a maximum of 3 FJ bases which given current plans are probably going to be Conningsby, Leuchars and Lossiemouth.

It is now generally accepted that the Tornado GR$ fleet is going to be culled. The question is will the whole fleet be gone by 2015 or with 50% carry on to 2020. The Harriers will obviously soldier on to the introduction of whatever platform equips the CVFs though I can see the Super Hornet being delivered before the CVFs arrive if ordered to allow the units to sttand up witht he OCU initially forming in the US to allow instructors to gain carrier experience.

The “Pots” of money within the MoD’s budget are quite flexible. Unfortunately , historically the OPerations and Logistics budget have been reduced frozen to meet overspends in Procurement. THst is why I always said that what was the DLO should have taken the lead when it amalgamated with DPA to form DE&S as the latter have never had a handle on operating costs or spares requirements. The Typhoon is a good example where insufficient spares were ordered leading to parts being taken from the airframe production line to support operational units.

With the coming cull the RAF is going to have to look at long term capabilities. The Typhoon has greater growth potential and more flexibility than the Tornado fleet. It is the first genuine “Swing” role platfrom the RAF will operate. If the F-35B is off the table the Typhoon is the only game in town initially for the RAF to recapitalise it FJ fleet arbeit a smaller one. Later as I have stated before there maybe funds to purchase a mature UCAV or a manned platform.

Going back to Lossiemouth I never meant to infer that it would be manned by the RAF if the FAA’s new aircraft or based there. It would become a FAA operated station with, as is the current trend, on site contractor support.

Whilst the Treasury is very effectively taking on the role of the Grim Reaper regarding defence spending even it knows that there is a minimum requirement to meet the UK’s needs. THis is obviously what the SDSR is going to highlight and when I asy MINIMUM that is what I mean. The Armed Forces are going to be cut to the absolute minimum, retained capabilites that are essential and just maybe gaining a few new ones but these will be ISTAR driven and not involove much new hardware. Some core cpabilities will be retained almost at a cadre level support by the TA, RAF Aux etc.

Sorry for the doom and gloom but I saw what was happening during the “Good” times financially for the UK and knowing how the system works cannot see much good comming out of the SDSR. I think we will have to wait until at least 2015 to see this trend reversing and even that may be being too optimistic.

Tthis is why I am all for dumbing down the T26 to a C2 configuration initially until the T23 retire then moving kit over to a further batch of C2 leaving the intial batch still fitted for but not with. This together with a modualr C3 but will minimise any capability gap and finally being to increase the number of platforms in the RN back towards 30. Right now it is more of a numbers game than one of capability and one I hope the RN understands.

The more I listen to interviews with Lian FOx regarding the SDSR and the review of capbilities one o gthe big changes the RN is going to face is that to maintain viable numbers its platforms are going to be more and more 80% solutions with the T-45s being the last “Gold Plated” solutions for some time. The CVFs actually fall into this catagory as will the C2 and C3 platforms. I can see the first batch of C2s being fairly austire in their equipment fit with the second batch recieving equipment from the T-23s becoming pseudo C1s. WE are not going to get any super T-45 sized general purpose platform for quite some time so the C2/T-26 should be looked upon as the successor the the T-21, cheap to build and makes up the numbers, that way we could get as many as 12-15 new platforms with growth potential for the future.

The more C3 is discussed I become clear that it is going to have to be a modular design to meet all the requirements, but hopefully the modules will be transportable by support vessels allowing plug in and play reconfiguration on duty stations. Core capbilities like the ability to operate a medium sized helicoper and a medium calibre gun up to 76mm and atleast one RIB should be accepted but everything else is on the pallets