The CTOL versus V/STOL argument is a perpetual one here, Jonesey has fallen for the V/STOL argument and that is fair enough, we are all entitled to are opinion and as long as we can Justify it and Jonesey certainly can, however I am not convinced.

The targeting argument, to me at least, does not hold water to me. Storm Shadow carrying Tornadoes have been able to function in long range operations without the assets that Jonesy claims are required.

The sortie rate argument, in my opinion this is largely irrelevant, the need to surge large strike packages of JSF’s is likely to be rare at best and the loss of fuel that the V/STOL version suffers is unlikely to be offset by a CTOL having to wait in the air for a few minutes longer than if it was CTOL for its buddys.

Cost, fair enough, CTOL is more expensive but the figures are not absurdly vast and as always you get what you pay for.

On the other hand the sacrifice that is made in terms of range, and payload for the JSF is very substantial and in my opinion a significant sacrifice is being made in this area. The loss of internal weapons carriage space is of particular concern

Sure these ships are expected to undertake a number of roles but the ability of Ocean to carry Apaches, combined with the very powerful nature of the rest of the RN amphib force should to a significant extent reduce the requirement for the CVF’s to provide CAS (obviously they will still be required in this role). I would argue that the need for fuel and weapons carriage in this role is also very important in order for the aircraft to remain over the target area for extended periods of time and satisfy multiple calls for fire, the V/STOL decision makes sacrifices in both of these areas. The other area in which I feel that increased range is required is in keeping these very powerful and expensive assets away from the littorals. With the increasing prevalence of SSK’s (of all sizes) and shore based anti-ship missiles it seems sensible to me to keep your most powerful assets as far from the coast as possible.

Just my two cents but essentially this argument is a subjective one and down to individual opinion and as most people here can justify their positions on this issue it seems pointless to continue this debate in perpetuity.

Just one last point, From the point of view of the US I regard the F-35B as one of the most important military programs currently in existence, why? Becouse despite the rantings of some in the Air Force the USN is currently the foundation of US military hegemony and that is obviously based on overwhelming numerical and technological superiority. What the F-35B does is to reinforce this and advance it in a way that the F-35C alone never could. The B enables the US to effectively double the number of strike carriers that it has if the situation ever calls for it. For this reason I regard the AEW Osprey as potentially one of the most important ‘should-be’ programs for the US military at the moment. LHA/LHD’s loaded with F-35B’s and AEW Ospreys (at the expense of the largest part of their amphip capability temporarily) would make them very powerful sea/battle space control assets, the sheer force multiplication of this can not be understated.

Why is every one so concerned with new? New does not neccesarily mean better. The G33 may be an old design and no longer in production but at the time we are talking about it was new and provided the reliability that took years and heaven knows how many £million to provide in the SA80 (or as it is known in service L85A1). One of the biggest problems with the SA80 was the fact that if you ran with it slung and a magazine in place when you stopped there was a good chance the magazine had gone. This was because the weapon was designed to use M16 Mags with a side catch rather than produce a weapon and magazines with a latch at the rear of the magazine housing a la FN/FAL, this fault was overcome with a lash up solution whereby a shroud was fitted around the mag release with an adhesive not much better than glorified superglue and had a habit of coming off easily and leaving you with the original problem again. Again why is new so good? The M16 is an even older design but its users still swear by it. In the end we are still talking weapons chambered for a round that first came into existence in 1935 as opposed to the 1937 of the 7.62 round. Originally know as .223″ Remington and .308″ Winchester.

Sorry but none of that is a viable argument, the fact is that the SA-80 has become an effective and reliable weapon that has proved to be very adaptable.

The basic point that I missed was that, at the time the decision on the SA80 was made, ROF had a majority share holding in H&K so it would have been more cost effective to purchase the G33 direct from the factory.

Why? By all accounts the SA-80 is now an excellent weapon and by comparison the G-33 is now an elderly out of production design.

Question would be though SLL what point there would be in retaining Vixens in podded form when GR9 isnt going to be cleared for AIM-120 anytime soon….especially when you consider that ASRAAM clearance has been halted on cost grounds!. Also, even if such a capability was to suddenly be granted, only the remaining FAA FA2 pilots will have any skills for the BVR air-air fight.

For my money the sole remaining a2a capability left to the CVS’s revolves around the situational awareness that a Harrier could take from the ASaC7’s and for the opponent to be technically austere!.

I was not even suggesting that the radars were going to be podded now, simply that they are being kept boxed up so if push came to shove they could be put in pods and AMRAAM’s cleared……..I shouldnt have to tell you how fast things can move if there is a bit of urgency.;)

Blue Vixen. The Indians already have Blue Fox, on their FRS.51s

I have a conspiracy theory about the Blue Vixen issue, it goes like this. The UK has no problem with India having the radar, the problem is the UK not having it. I am sure that we have all heard the rumors of a podded version, my suspicion is that they are true and that the radar sets have been retained to be used as such in an emergency. Just a thought.

Yes, a communist state that embraces capitalism and consumerism… you just have to become a communist party member to get a vote at election time…
Perhaps the problem is not calling a pig a cow… the real problem is that the wolf has sheeps clothing on and you are laughing at me calling the cute little sheep a wolf?

…not that I have anything against China…

hahahahaha a communist state that abandons the principles of communism, seriously Garry you are hilarious.:D