dark light

thinkdefence

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Type 26 Design Unveiled #2012065
    thinkdefence
    Participant

    I wrote a fairly long piece on Type 26 if you fancy popping over !

    http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2012/08/the-type-26-global-combat-ship-2/

    Cheers if you do:)

    in reply to: The UK F35 debate topic (separate from CVF discussion) #2021033
    thinkdefence
    Participant

    What do you guys think of the whole austere basing thing, just finished a post on the San Carlos Harrier FOB in 1982 if you fancy a read.

    http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2012/04/harrier-forward-operating-base-falkland-islands/

    Some relevant stuff for the discussion perhaps

    in reply to: CVF Construction #2021372
    thinkdefence
    Participant

    Just to clarify the issue of EMALS contracts etc, this just published by the House of Commons

    Angus Robertson (Moray, Scottish National Party)

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his Department has stopped any work or deferred signing contracts on (a) the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System and (b) the arrester hook equipment.

    Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 18 April 2012, c371W)

    Peter Luff (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Defence Equipment, Support and Technology), Defence; Mid Worcestershire, Conservative)

    We have not yet signed any contracts for the procurement of any Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment, be that the Electro-Magnetic Aircraft Launch System or Advanced Arrestor Gear.

    in reply to: CVF Construction #2021586
    thinkdefence
    Participant

    Cost of operating aircraft…

    Its a nightmare trying to get anything sensible and to be perfectly honest, I suspect the answers that are given have a degree of ‘variability’ in them so even when released as part of a Parliamentary Answer I would still treat them only as guidelines.

    The MoD doesn’t publish externally its rates but when asked as part of an FOI Request or Parliamentary Answer then you can piece them together.

    The full rate includes more or less the kitchen sink and as I said above, will be averaged out over the fleet. So the Typhoon, which is still coming into service and therefore front end cost loaded over a smaller fleet will look very expensive, the £90k per hour figure a few years has since dropped down to £70k an hour.

    The marginal rate that sometimes comes out of the woodwork is for consumables and fuel.

    These are the result of stitching together various MoD and Parliamentary answers etc so not official but reasonable for a guideline

    Tornado GR4, £35,000
    Tornado F3, £43,000
    Typhoon, £70,000
    Harrier GR7/GR9, £37,000
    Apache AH1, £42,000
    C17, £42,000
    C130J, £12,000
    C130K, £10,000
    E3D Sentry, £33,000

    The marginal rate appears to be roughly the same no matter what, so an Apache will cost roughly the same per hour as a Tornado, about £5k an hour!

    There is also a rate for the Hawk T1 at between £6k and £10k per hour depending on whether they are flown by the Red Arrows, the Royal Navy or the RAF and before anyone jumps on that, the Red Arrows are the cheapest and the RAF training T1’s the most expensive but only because that cost includes simulators that the others use as well.

    This illustrates perfectly why comparing operating costs for different aircraft is almost impossible

    in reply to: CVF Construction #2021830
    thinkdefence
    Participant

    The MoD usually releases two sets of flying costs per hour, full and marginal.

    The full rate includes a wide range of things and with an aircraft that is early in its service life will be artificially higher because of accounting charges, forward and depth servicing, fuel costs, crew costs and training costs, Typhoon for example started out at over £90k per hour full and the last time it was published I think it had come down to £70k. This is because the fleet costs are spread over a larger number of airframes and hours.

    The marginal rates are very similar for most fast jets, Typhoon (£3,780) and Harrier (£3,945) for example, 2009/2010 figures

    Last time I looked, the C17 was the most expensive to operate RAF aircraft, although don’t hold me to that

    in reply to: CVF Construction #2022112
    thinkdefence
    Participant

    This is my first post here but just wanted to say to Jonesy, spot on.

    It is really refreshing to read nothing but commonsense as opposed to the frothing, recycled third hand, sentimental hyperbole that so often characterises these discussions.

    It was a pleasure reading your posts.

    By the way, Liger, can you offer up any evidence for the following

    the Joint Force experience did not work that well at all

    It is an abomination that cancelled the fleet air defence segment

    brought to the end of carrier strike in 2010

    less than optimal results with poor RAF pilot performance in Sierra Leone

    Seriously, it is nothing short of a swindle. It was a trick from the very beginning

    in reply to: UK Defence Review Part I #2398313
    thinkdefence
    Participant

    The post that you are linking to was from one of our contributors, its a very interesting take on the subject

    I also published a number of ideas, primarily here

    http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2010/06/fdr-littoral-4/

    This post makes the point that what is needed for C3 is very far from a ‘warship’ and must be designed with low cost and flexibility in mind

    We have been running a ‘future defence review’ series of posts for some time now

    http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/category/defencereviews/thinkdefence/

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)