I did not know that Intruders ever operated off the Ark! How did the A-6 stack up to the Buc?

According to page 135 of a book entitled Fly Navy: Aircraft of the Fleet Air Arm Since 1945 written by Ray Williams and published by Airlife in 1989 and I quote “From the early days of Buccaneer development the Blackburn Aircraft Company were confident that it would achieve overseas sales. Initially there were hopes that they would sell it to the US Navy but in the event the Grumman A-6 Intruder was selected.” I think I’ve read elsewhere of an interest in selling the aircraft to the US Navy or indeed purchase by the US Navy but the Gyron Junior powerplant was the deal breaker. Of course there’s also the fact that it was a British aircraft and that was undoubtedly a factor in the USN’s decision.
As to how they stack up
A-6 Intruder compared to Buccaneer S.Mk2*<br />
A-6 INTRUDER BUCCANEER S.MK2<br />
WING SPAN: 53ft 0in 42ft 4in<br />
WIDTH FOLDED: 25ft 2in 19ft 11in<br />
LENGTH OVERALL: 54ft 7in 63ft 5in<br />
LENGTH FOLDED: 54ft 7in 51ft 10in<br />
HEIGHT OVERALL: 15ft 7in 16ft 6in<br />
HEIGHT FOLDED: 15ft 10in 16ft 8in<br />
WHEEL TRACK: 10ft 10in 11ft 10.5in<br />
WEIGHTS<br />
EMPTY: 25,684ib 30,000ib<br />
NORMAL T/O: 54,393ib 56,000ib<br />
MAXIMUM T/O: 60,626ib 62,000ib<br />
MAXIMUM SPEED: 644mph 645mph<br />
SERVICE CEILING:44,600ft 40,000ft+<br />
POWERPLANT: 9,300ib P&W J52 (x2) 11,100ib RR RB 168 Spey (x2)<br />
PAYLOAD: 18,000ib 12,000ib<br />
RANGE: 3,107miles 2,300miles
* Sources Jane’s All The World’s Aircraft 1968/69 Edited by John W.R. Taylor published by McGraw-Hill 1968, http://www.blackburn-buccaneer.co.uk, http://www.wikipedia.org, Carrier Aviation Air Power Directory: The World’s Carriers And Their Aircraft 1950-Present Written by David Donald and Daniel J. March published by AIRtime Publishing in 2001, World Aircraft Information Files various issues.

Well its about 40+ years behind schedule and it’ll be sitting in a museum rather than on the flight deck of HMS Eagle in 899 RNAS’ colours but nevertheless its intended owners, the FAA will finally be taking delivery of it :).

Your points about Ark Royal strike me as being increasingly bizarre. The fact that she wasn’t actually in the South Atlantic is immaterial. Any Argentine planner would have had to take into account that, following an Argentine occupation of the Falklands, Britain had the means to retake the islands. There would therefore be no point initiating force if you were going to lose. That’s deterrence. We had it in 1977, we didn’t in 1982. Not only did the government in 1982 not give the impression that it would defend the Falklands, but by cutting the Royal Navy’s surface fleet, it gave the impression that it couldn’t even if it wanted to. Given those two conditions, the only surprise should have been if the Argentines didn’t invade.

Now thats the part of you statement that I can agree with, and thought that myself. Even though Ark Royal couldn’t have reached the islands in time to prevent invasion, the existence of that vessel with its Phantoms, Buccaneers and AEW Gannets together with the existence of Hermes, Bulwark, Fearless, Intrepid, the Round Tables, Lion and Tiger and numerous Destroyers, frigates and submarines would have sent a clear message to the planners in Buenos Aires; “You may be able to take the islands, but we can make you give them back, and we’ll tear up your armed forces and probably bring down your whole stinking government in the bargain.” And that is the nature of deterrence. Did the Argentines even have Exocets back then?

the UK is ditching the VTOl variant and reducs the number of planes it will buy
The neterlands is reducing numbers…
Norway doubts…
Australia is worried…

The final storylines are being written?

Weird isn’t it if the f35 project would have delivered as planned all this would not have happened

Could someome tell me the difference, beyond the obvious naval equipment between the F-35A and C? And if there isn’t any, as a means of reducing costs, couldn’t the USAF and other potential A operators buy the C?

Is it possible that they’ll replace the C-130…
with yet another new variant of the C-130? One that’s optimised for STOVL and carrier ops?

i feel i should say i was wrong about the F35B.

although i dont follow the logic yet, the government have knock it on the head (and i assume are doing so in part to underline how much of a shambles defence procurement was under labour, like the MRA4).

right, i feel so much better…:(

Thats okay, Part of me wants to perform a snoopy dance over the decision to go for CTOL but another part of me is sad over the demise, for the time being at least, of fixed wing naval aviation and of Ark Royal’s premature scrapping, not to mention to me there’s still some uncertainty over Queen Elizabeth’s ultimate fate. I wish we would get F/A-18Es and the RAF to get F-35Bs but I guess there isn’t the money :mad:.

The Navy is probably the UKs most secure defender.

Eh? An aircraft carrier is the biggest and most vulnerable target we could possibly have. Besides, why would you think sacrificing a fleet of Tornado GR4s and Harriers for a dozen operational F35s would make even the slightest sense? Trident doesn’t really come into it, that’s a separate issue entirely.

Yeah an Aircraft Carrier which can move at 30 to 40 MPH and change direction is way more vulnerable than an Army base, or an RAF airfield which can move at approximately 1 inch per million years or something, I’m afraid continental drift isn’t my strong suit. Oh and the crew of the Aircraft Carrier don’t take their family along with them.