AE90^^ you can but why you would want to escapes me.
Newcastle certainly isn’t dangerous if thats what your meaning. I was born here 17 years ago and not seen anything horrible ever!
haha, private end of killy or the cheap end?
west newcastle is certainly nothing to be desired you could call it worse than rough.
AE90^^ you can but why you would want to escapes me.
Newcastle certainly isn’t dangerous if thats what your meaning. I was born here 17 years ago and not seen anything horrible ever!
haha, private end of killy or the cheap end?
west newcastle is certainly nothing to be desired you could call it worse than rough.
AE90As for Israel and Japan – I am sure an F-15C is more capable than an a Tornado ADV.
in the same sense that in the ground role F-15E doesn’t touch a GR.4
ADV is a treetop strike fighter with a slightly modified engine and a decent BVR radar not a fighter, however more than enough to deal with the threat they were designed for (in a word BEARS)[that does sound like im selling them short though, they still are a good aircraft but are built to fly at low level using high lift devices and the likes]
F-15E is a fighter with some ground role weapons hanging from the undercarriage not a strike aircraft by any stretch of the imagination.
AE90CVA-01 should’ve gone ahead. If GB actually had a strong leader ie the late Enoch Powell the petty squabble between the services would not have happened. Vickers 583 with the capability of Tornado in RAF & RN guises 10 years earlier & P1154 (sea harriers) with the performance of the Jaguar, H139 for sea control & AEW. CVA-01 replacing Centuar 1972ish CVA-01 replacing Ark ’76ish, CVA-03 Vicky’80ish, CVA-04 Eagle ’84ish & finally CVA-05 Hermes in 88. The later 3 could well have been possibly improved to say an enlarged invincible layout only scaled up to around 50,000t with the gas turbine propulsion on 3 shafts as described earlier.
As for escorts leanders were good possibly a further 16 with gas turbines 1/2 with Ikara in lieu of 4 1/2 inch 6 sea wolf & martels aft of the bridge & 1/2 with single 4 1/2 inch gun.
Politically a strong leader makes a strong economy. Strong economy equals more money. More money gives better RN.
As Falklands proved no CAP no ships. how do you think a couple of dozen frigates in the gap would’ve fared when a two or three squadrons of backfires zoomed in on them. They would join the subs beneath the wave.
The carriers were needed & still are, & always will be.
are we saying that enoch would be PM? either way 5 carriers was never ever going to happen even if defence spending was 7% by 1982 this was 5.8%
thats a little optimistic and then some.
AE90Britain should make a high priority of pushing for two LPH’s rather than further surface combatants.
^^… Does make a valid point but the navy would need great restructuring and the surface combatants of the fleet are in a dire mess.. C.2 should ideally be entering service around 2016 (with the first few hulls replacing the T22B3’s and the later hulls replacing the T23’s without the T2087’s), it is a no thrills warship and doesn’t dip into the funds that much, C.1 isn’t likely to enter service until after Vanguards are replaced (the remaining T23’s will be SLEP’d no doubt about it)[i do realise this means the only vessel capable of serving as a task force flag ship is the expensive to operate T45 but there are little alternatives] so there should be enough yard space and funds for 2 new lph’s with ISD’s of Early 2021 and late 2022 (wouldn’t be too hard to expect the Ark to serve until 2021 and Ocean to 2022)
AE901. The lack of air to air capability exposes high value assets other than the carriers, for example amphibious forces, certain supply vessels and those assets that lack an anti air warfare capability, eg mines counter measures vessels. It undermines the concept of defence in depth. The carriers are escorted and surrounded by other ships so the threat to them is mitigated. The threat to the rest of a task group, however, is increased.
2. what perceivable threat is there to the royal navy that have air launched AShM capabilites in the next 10-12 years?
They probably said the same thing in 1981.:confused::eek: The number of nations thus equipped may surprise you.
3. See the PPRuNe Sea Jet thread.
1981, yes i would probably have said the same thing, but that cannot be repeated.
AE90I disagree … there is a massive requirement for them, because without any decent A2A a/c the current carriers a naked and obscenely vulnerable!
what perceivable threat is there to the royal navy that have air launched AShM capabilites in the next 10-12 years? I don’t like to see SHAR’s go but it was one of the better ways of saving money, im beggining to accept that defence spending isn’t going to increase over time, and we’re going to have to deal with the fact that by 2020 the navy would be hard pushed to defend a medium sized swimming pool, so cuts will have to be made including shar’s being retired early (it was a better descisison than paying off 3 T23’s early)
AE90The single biggest mistake the UK made was not to convert their harriers to + standaard with a radar like the US did, so it could be a true multirole aircraft.
They should have opted for 3 30.000 ton carrriers instead of the huge useless behemoths they will be getting with apparantly no aircraft, lol.
As for buying C17 and A400M, they should have made up their mind a long time ago and just bought 10 C17’s instead of waiting for a less good EU alternative.
The best thing they can do is advance the retirement of all tornado F3’s, but as i always said they will probably cancel the carriers at some point, mistakes from the past are ALWAYS repeted in the future!.
3 30000ton carriers would have cost upwards of 5bn, increasing the size and increasing the price of the carriers is not a proportional ratio, if the carriers were 300m long and 85,000t you’d still get change from 5bn
I do agree with the advanced retirement of the mk3’s however there isn’t enough Typhoons to get away with it yet, knocking off a couple of the mk4 squadrons would help.
C130’s aren’t an alternative to A400m, neither is C17, A400 falls between the 2 and bridges the gap between tactical and strategic transport and i beleive that all 3 have a place in the RAF
there were some harriers with radars they were sea harriers and they were true multirole and better in the role than the +’s unfortunately for those there are no real operational requirement for these anymore.
AE901. Would probably cost more. We’d have to pay penalties for pulling out of A400M, & then buy C-17 & C-130J at whatever the Yanks chose to charge.
that might not have to happen, refusing to waive the fines for late deliveries will leave airbus freezing UK production and give airbus the ultimatum (pay the fine for late deliveries or a mutual cancellation of RAF commitments)
Also without the transport FRES can remain on the back burner well into the next decade
2. Because this is (if it’s real, not just a rumour) an RAF proposal, not an MoD policy. The RAF would not willingly transfer aircraft to the RN, as it would also have to transfer budget. This proposal, if real, looks like an attempt to undermine the carriers & the whole idea of RN carrier aviation. Can the Harriers, then say “but what point are the carriers without aircraft?”.
hmm binning the harriers and early scrapping of Vincy and Lusty and keeping the Ark to complement Ocean for the next 10-12 years (or longer seeing as Ocean being SLEP’d is a strong possibility[she is after all already middle aged] and there are no plans to even look at a replcamcenet yet])
does loosen up a bit of extra funds to keep the more important projects going/fill the black hole
what im beginning to wonder is if the navy will retalliate against the RAF and their Typhoons, either way it’ll end in tears.
AE90… Nimrod isn’t the right platform for this, the money should have gone to keeping the order at 18 rather than 12 andsodding about with things like this
AE90knew it was only a matter of time, i think we all did.
can’t see it happenening nonetheless
^^i’d settle for a liberal government over an incompetent government.. or was that not the choice? In my heart of hearts i’m a moderately right wing socialist, theres no political party for me!! however thats digressing.
AE90I wonder if the Tornado couldn’t be hardened and used temporarily on the new UK air craft carriers that are planned just in case the F-35 isn’t ready by then.
i’m positive that it wasn’t only me that heard AFVG echoing in their head as they read that.
i would doubt that it’s possible now no matter how much money is thrown at it, about 40 years too late to be honest.(50 years too late by the time the carriers are operational and by the time tornado’s leave service it
wont be much shy of a 60 year old design, only other front line jet that is that old would be harrier (lets say 1957-2020)
as for Tornado replacement i had heard about the possibility of some F35c’s assuming the void that will be left as tornado leaves service but tornado can’t be replaced in the treetop strike role by anything currently in service or entering service in the near future, the capability goes down with the ship i think.
most feasable manned solution would be a big wing typhoon with an engine based on a fat EJ with a bypass in the region of 1.2-1.5 with sensors and avionics that fit the bill, that would carry some payload! but sticking bombs on a fighter and calling it a strike fighter isn’t the most desirable solution (F-15E anyone?) and i dont think we’re prepared to throw that much money at the problem to be honest.
as for next generation tornado’s wasn’t there originally a plan to totally redeisn the tornado’s with faceted noses, ventral fuel tanks, low RCS intakes and lots of other fancy stuff that was eventually binned and we ended up with GR.4’s?
AE90short on tankers, short on transport, short on men, short of an air force
bit long but it’s a fitting epitaph
AE90Sorry if i post without reading all the topic but why cannot you buy something similar to the italian FREMM?
We are speaking about a big (6000 ton) front-line frigate, capable of some AAW area-defence (active empar + 16/32 Aster-30), hangar for two helos, ASuW missiles, 76mm and 127mm guns, both with guided ammo (anti-missiles Davide/Dart for the 76mm and the new Volcano for 127mm, land attack), towed array sonar and good electronics.
1 gas-turbines, CODAG, max speed around 28 – 29 knots (not 27 like french, cause they use CODOG) and some stealth capabilities.
FREMM is a step too far, neither C1 nor C2 need Aster’s and if it is realised that T45’s current numbers cannot manage AAW the most sensible option would just be 2 more.
as for propulsion, it has to be IEP
i was unaware the RAN had used catamaran mine hunters and even more so that they had performed poorly, the lack of a hull in the water to get blown up seemed a good idea obviously sophisticated hull mounted sensors, well it goes without saying.
AE90couple of flaws in that, your plans for c3 are far too large for an Auxilary combatant/sweeper/.. etc.
as for C2. export is poor if existant at all, imo i would have a small frigate (115-120m and under the 4000t bracket), it would be possible to squeeze, VLS for quadpacked camm, 2 harpoon launchers, mk8 (or the BAe Mk8 155mm proposal), phalanx, Sting Ray’s and a hangar for a merlin should be possible although i dont like the idea on a ship under 5000t aswell as the relevant sensors and the likes.. should give you a ship that is cost effective with a large market for export (it’s nearly a drag and drop replacement for MEKO 200’s)
C3, well c2 lacking the sensors and almost definitely lacking the VLS CAMM without the hangar to free up some space for whatever it wants.. can’t really advocate putting a 155mm gun on it 57 or 76 would be more fitting but to introduce a new calibre for the sake of an auxilary combatant is a non starter
C1 almost univeral calls for a stretched T45 hull without the expensive AAW kit, more missile silo’s, totting SCALP, CAMM. Harpoon boxes are a must, LARGE hanar and torpeedo’s for ASW, Mk8 (or mk8 155mm). 2087’s ripped off of the T23’s Artisan search radar, Goalkeepers
numbers
T45:6
C1:8
C2:10+
C3:8 (with a Catamaran GRP vessel to replace sanddowns
obviously, it’s not exactly a 32escort all singing all dancing fleet, but if in the later half of the next decade there is a reason to return to a larger fleet it can all be increased (T45 will be 10 years old but possibly 4 T45B3’s on the C1 hull with more VLS silo’s than the vanilla T45 and ASTER ABM’s to boot could be an option if required)
btw as for names until now i’ve not really cared but come to think of it perhaps C1 could be a new Battle class where the public choose the most important battles since the act of union, the governments always banging on about national identity
Sign In
