Geoff_BWell the rather exposed aft suddenly gives vikrant a very canberra/juan carlos look.
Except it shouldn’t be, basically it looks as if they put the bows on and painted it so looked good from the front ready for a scheduled launch date. Its a PR stunt as they obviously haven’t finished the basic hull and hanger structure let alone the sponsons and Island, so its going to have to go back into to drydock to be completed sometime next year (Unless the shipyard has double booked the slips again for another quick commercial build !) by which time the press would label it as seriously delayed and steal its fanfare.
Geoff_BScooter will be a fully signed up card carrying member of this lot:- https://www.f35.com/support/statement-of-support
It’s a pointless exercise trying to have a rational discussion as their only aggenda is to spread the F-35 word wherever, whenever regardless of how suitable or acceptable it is, so don’t bother wasting your bandwidth.
Anyway back onto the subject at hand and is there any news about the construction in the new Indian Carrier, has it gone back into the drydock to complete assembly or is the Shipyard still doing commercial ships leaving the future flagship on the Indian Navy stuck alongside in Limbo ?
Geoff_BWell for the Phantom FGR2 in 1/72nd you want the Fujimi FGR2 kit as its the best of the F-4M’s available, for the Harrier GR-3 you best with the Italeri kit and with the Lightning Fmk6 i suppose the Trumpeter is the the best injection moulded kit although the pinched tail pipe section is best replaced with an aftermarket Resin set.
If you want a two seater Lighting T5 then you need either the Neomega resin conversion set for the Trumpeter kit or the Whirlybird all resin Lighning T5
Geoff_BThere are an awful lot of things on an aircraft that generate heat.
Engines, pumps, electronics, etc, all produce heat that can be fiendishly hard to get rid of (efficiently).
Plus there is the added effects of the 2006 weight purge expecially on the F-35B. To get the weight down they had to redesign and/or reposition components without a great deal of time to fully assess the impact of the changes.
I know one of the effects was to reduce the internal air flow cooling, reducing the size and effectiveness of component heat sinks and of course placing sensitive items nearer to a heat source than intended. Couple this with internal heat levels being higher than expected and you start to understand why its an issue.
The issues should resolve itself over time, as they can now study the aircraft in use rather than take the computer generated guesitimates. So temperature, airflow and cooling can now be measured, and the mods made to the airframe or components to resolve the issue. Thankfully it should be one of those issues that disappears when the design is finalised and in full production.
Geoff_B
Oh, THAT Carlo Kopp 😉
Thought he looked familiar its ‘Brian Potter’form Phoenix Nights 😀
Geoff_BGiven the news that the Type 26 design is being finalised, it would be interesting to see how it pans out.
Will it end up being equipped with UCAVs for example (had to put aviation in here somewhere);)
The real thing that concerns me however, is that at the moment they envisage only 13 will be ordered, so I imagine this means the RN will end up with 8 or so.
The envisage 13 to replace the type 23 but the final price will determine how many they can afford at the time.
They are hedging thier bets by not committing to 13 so it doesn’t become dogma thus should they only be able to fund 12 or 10 and look to a black swan type sloop to make up hull numbers.
Nice to see the basic design now agreed, it looks like they have dropped the under the flight deck mission bays as originallly propossed and encased then into the more built up superstructure ahead of the hanger bay.
Aviation wise its Merlin or Wildcat plus uav platforms.
Hopefully they will start construction after the PoW blocks have left the shipyards and the 2020 date reflects when the ship is ready for service rather than starting sea trials !!!
Geoff_BSintra i find your selection of the Air France Concorde on fire before its fatal crash highly unsuitable for the thread, a conventional picture of concorde would have sufficed.To select one where the passengers and crew would be shortly killed is in very poor taste 🙁
Geoff_BIndeed Geoff_B, it was a disingenuous headline when the current intend OSD for Typhoon in the UK is considered. Now I do think that the OSD is rather optimistic considering significant numbers of Typhoon have been transferred without replacement and Tranche 3 slashed but nevertheless that doesn’t mean F35A is on the cards at the moment.
There might be some logic down the line to purchase F35A as a partial GR4 replacement to ease the flight hours on the Typhoon and F35B.
SDSR will be Tornado D-day
UK policy to have a fast jet fleet based on two types of modern multi-role aircraft means the Tornado force will be run down broadly in line with the build-up of the Typhoon force and introduction of the Joint Strike Fighter. Defence Equipment, Support and Technology Minister Peter Luff said that, for
planning purposes, the out of service date for Tornado is 2019, but no firm decisions need to be taken before the next SDSR in 2015.Typhoon Squadrons currently at RAF Leuchars will move to RAF Lossiemouth
with Typhoons maintained at RAF Coningsby. Decisions on JSF basing will be made in due course.
In this month MOD in-house mag DESIDER, that helps clarify a few matters and confirms like most defence issues that the real choices will be made at the next SDSR
Geoff_BWhy is it false?
Becuse the only real confirmed aspect of the article is that the UK initial order will be for 48 F-35B, which is what the headline should be as that was a news item in its self. janes choose to go with with a headline based on hearsay and speculated that the UK MOD ‘might’ be looking at F-35A in addition the the ‘F-35B’ due the laters cost and a possible greater need (replacement for Typhoon and Tornado in addition to the Harrier/SHars which the JCA was inteded to replace).
Thats why its a false headline.
Geoff_BWhat is the current life left in the Tornado fleet roughly on current useage versus the expected IOC for the RAF & FAA/RN B’s ? Is there potentially a gap for you guy’s or will Typhoon cover this ? I am assuming the majority of the first batch of 48 will go to the RAF ? With FAA/RN having a gap of approx ~10 years, IIRC, between carriers is there any plans in place for the transition period. IE: Would they maintain the pilot capability over this period for the RN, or would they lead in closer to QE comissioning
Cheers
Will just ad, yes I did read the article, but timing seems a bit off, and depending of the state of the Tornado’s what I am getting at is this a possible sticking point between the RAF & RN 🙂
Nope the RAF may get the initial unit but the priority with those 48 aircraft is Carrier Strike so the Navy will be getting a full squadron and another will be mixed. The first carrier is due for operational service by 2021 and a full squadron by 2023.
Typhoons will cover the Tornado shortfall, as the F-35s will still be being delivered and developing their operational capabilities, as most of the RAF weapons won’t be initially certified for F-35 use .
Geoff_BNo, there is no cut to 48 F-35. Read the article, not the untrue headline!
What’s wrong with reading comprehension round here? And memories?The initial order is 48. This is pretty much what has always been expected. It’s always been the plan to buy in batches. Note that some of the idiots here & elsewhere have been claiming that we wouldn’t even buy that many, but not more than 40.
The MoD & defence secretary have clearly stated that not only is the 48 an initial order, but there will be follow-on orders. Final numbers will not be decided before the SDSR in 2015.
F-35A is a product of a journalist’s imagination. There is nothing in what Hammond or the MoD says to suggest it. I’m pretty sure that F-35 as a Typhoon replacement is equally imaginary, & is someone (maybe Hammond – he’s ignorant enough about the military) getting Typhoon confused with Tornado.
What astonishes me is that this story comes from Janes.
Correct the 48 F-35B are to meet the Carrier Strike requirement of JCA, and the good news is that they are already ring fencing 48 aircraft of the type for this role. The MOD confirmed this along with the standard F-35 mantra that final F-35 numbers will be determined as part of or after the 2015 SDSR.
The grey area which is unconfimred was Hammond expresssing concern over the F-35B costs, or the Typhoon replacement reference. The journalist took this to speculate that they may switch some of the remaining aircraft after the 48 F-35B to the cheaper F-35A. Thats why the headline used ‘might’ and why the RAF & RN types were taken by surprise as their preference would probably be for an all B force as common variant and means they could all be deployed via the carrier force or allied units.
As Swerve said this aspect is completely unfounded and unconfirmed and like many things its somethinge were not going to see untill the 2015 SDSR.
It does raise some questions as ideally we would need at least 80+ F-35B eventually, as in theory should we retain both carriers with one in frontline duty and the other refit/reserve, then in times of emergency we would want to be able to deploy both with full airgroups, even if one of those is almost all RAF rather than RN.
There are however other factors which may well be driving a revision of the JCA program as it was envisaged in the early noughties as primarily a Harrier replacment for the FAA & RAF, since then we have seen the premature retirement of the Harrier fleet, the Tornados earmarked for retirement in 2020 and possible early retirement of the Typhoon tranche 1. Couple this with the delayed Anglo-French UCAV to 2030+ and that what money earmarked for Tornado replacement would bundled in with the Carrier Strike on the switch to F-35C & CATOBAR carriers, together with suggestions of the preferred F-35 base switching from Lossie to Marham (possible counter to Scottish Independence issue), apparently to be close to the USAFE bases for common support of F-35 (except its the USAF with the F-35B whilst the USAF has the F-35A ?), and of course Marham would need something to fill the gap after Tornado !.
I would make a guess they may well be reviewing their plans in the next SDSR to reflect the changing situation and we might!!!well see a split in the original JCA concept into a Naval focused Carrier Strike capability and a seperate RAF heavy Strike/Figher Command which could result in mixed variant buy. Its way too early to tell as yet but i wouldn’t be surprised to see some changes in thinking.
Geoff_BYou mean the bulkhead? The one where they designed a fix and the 5th & 6th test airframes (and all built after that) were built with the new one?
No their is a wing spar issue as well as bulkhead weakness identified so far, although as far as i’m aware it was the existing bulkhead with strengthening plates added at present, they are still testing the revised design to determine the best alloy to use without adding too mch weight.
Word of note in general regarding the fixes, once an issue has been identified they determine the cause, how it effects the aircraft and then determine a fix. The ‘fix’ may be set limitation to flight ops or flight hours, patch up the part or chase the supplier if not upto QC standards. However most of the issues that require a redesign will take uptp a year or so to design a solution, then they build it, test it and then flight test it before they can be applied to the production line.
I got the impression the new bulkhead isn’t due to reach production for a couple of years, the same goes for the F-35B drive shaft, which is currently managed by the addition of spacers specific to each aircraft.
This is part of the reason why the US cut back 179 aircraft from the next 5 years schedule and kept the aircraft in LRIP, to reduce the impact of concurrency rebuilds to ealy aircraft, whilst the major fixes are designed and implemented.
The real ****-up with the JSF program was its overall management, they should have really created a YF-35 prototype first, used that to test and refine the hardawre before starting pre-production aircraft and then LRIP. Too much faith in computers to cut corners and reduce development time and too much of push to create demand and get orders before the product was anywhere near ready. It should and it will provide the next step in combat aircraft for the 2020’s, the touble was it was touted for the 2010’s which has led to costly mistakes.
Geoff_BAccording to the ACA they are going to be skidding super block 03 up the drydock to match up with lower block 02 (Weather permitting).
So hopefully by the end of today the front half of HMS Queen Elizabeth will be in one lower unit and the rest of the summer/autumn will be spent fitting the remaining upper blocks and sponsons till the last lower block (LB04) arrives from Glasgow in November.
During 2013 we should see all of the main blocks fitted with the launch (float out) scheduled for early 2014 🙂
Geoff_BSRVL is only needed for high pay-load bring back, so an aircraft could always revert to VL if fuel were low (dropping weapons if needed)
I think you will find they will use SRVL most of the time and only implement VL only when needed. Why because the SRVL is less stresful on the airframe, the engine/fan and of course the flight deck. That’s what Geoff Searle said when discussing the revision back to STOVL QEC and the use of SRVL.
Geoff_BThat’s a fantastic breakthrough order if true!!
I’ll wait until the ink is dry on the contract before jumping up and down though :rolleyes:
Ken
At this rate you’ll be putting builds on Haydn’s SIG stand at SMW;)
Sign In
