Lay off the drugs, it’s no were near the VM’s performance: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Giant-Gladiator.html
Care to clarify that?
What does it cost to decomission a CVN? All the RNs old attack boats are still around being maintained long after the navy have finished with them. How long do they have to be in storage untill their safe to dipose of? What happens to the old reactors and who pays for that! You don’t just put them in the dustbin, the spent fuel and irradiated reactors are going to be around for a long time, like hundreds of years. Put that in your through life costs and see how cheap nuclear powered ships are.
I guess you could encase them in concrete and dump them in the ocean, that would be cheap!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh dear god. Actually the high radioactivity waste would be around for closer to 10,000 years. Fortunately it can be disposed of along with the civilian stuff in the same sort of way. Irradiated material is irradiated material.
And it isn’t ocean dumped, it’d buried and encased in concrete.
I don’t know how long they have to be kept around (the boats), I assume it has something to do with waiting for fuel to be fully spent or short lived radioisotopes to decay. Either way the costs are factored in.
And if you factor in the rising cost of oil and possible insecurity of supplies, nuclear may be cheaper than you think.
Could someone enlighten me why the only news about RAF, RN and British Army ever is related to
1) Reducing the seize of the force
2) No helicoptersWhats wrong? Why is Britain hell bent on cutting her armed forces when the boys are always at War? Is it really that the UK is short of funds? Were these forces too large to begin with?
Because the UK press is useless on defence issues, so it takes people dying and generals moaning about their pet projects for anyone to actually listen.
Add in Gordon Brown hating the military and you have yourself a terrible set up for having to conduct a war or maintain force levels.
Pardon Me! What payload do UK SSBN’s carry?
Trident SSBNs with up to 10 warheads, why?
Whats UOR/s?
I’d wager the treasury/or ministry of finance in every nation has a spade to poke into any acquisition. What impressed me is that the procurement went through nonetheless, and the Javelin is not a cheap weapon.
Urgent Operational Requirement. A system that allows a fast track procurement with money direct from the treasury. Thinking through all the gear the guys are using out there, the vast majority has come through UORs. All our MRAPs, etc.
The Javelins will have come through that. The problem is the treasury effectively has final say on them. So when they question their usage, if they decide they aren’t being used cost effectively, they may not fund them properly etc. They don’t have any idea of what a warzone is like or how to fight one (they’re accountants after all) which creates issues.
I actually have a question, what influence does the treasury actually have over government spending if the government in power decided one day that they wanted to order 500 Typhoons and 50 Frigates etc.
Could the Treasury turn around and say, no, you can’t have the money.
If not, blame the government, not the treasury.
The govt. could simply increase the defence budget to accommodate them, which the treasury would only have a say in via the Chancellor, who in turn answers to the PM. So no, the treasury couldn’t really stop them, except when they go through the UOR process.
To return to topic, when the UK procurement works, it works fine!
1300 more Javelins for Afghanistan to top up stocks, and they didnt let beancounter objections stop them.
The fact that the Treasury are allowed to question when the soldiers fire a weapon under the guise of cost effectiveness scares the hell out of me, especially when they hold the purse strings on the only decent procurement system we have for the Afghan conflict, UORs.
“Another option under consideration is to only equip one of the carriers with aircraft, leaving the other to only operate with helicopters, which could save more than £3bn. Alternatively, the two carriers could share one complement of planes. The original plan envisaged equipping each carrier with 75 new US-made Joint Strike Fighter planes, but the cost has soared from the original price tag of £18m each.”
Obi Wan mentioned the numbers of planes being wrong, but look at the prices quoted! If we could get them that cheap i’d buy 500. At what point did they ever think an F35 would cost £18m????
Honestly, I have severe doubts that Mi-17 is expensive to operate or difficult to maintain. I’d say that while the time it requires might be comparable to NH90 or the likes but it requires a much smaller logistic and operational base, making it cheaper in the end effect. Western types are course techier and more sophisticated, the question is who really needs $25mil worth of electronics alone in a transport workhorse. (note that a fresh Mi-17 in basic config costs less than $9mil).
Yes.. and not only RAF but pretty much every Western air force. When I see price tags for S-70A or EH-101 series helicopters, it only makes me shake my head.
There is a reason for all those fancy electronics. They may not be used all the time but there are plenty of times when they’ll be necessary too. Even flying as a transport workhorse in Afghanistan, some will be helping land the things in brownout conditions etc. It all adds up to making the pilots job easier.
I made this point in the IN thread. If India (thats a big IF) purchase this big ship what are the planes she can operate from it. It doesn’t have a Ski Jump or EMALS/CATS does it ?
Would it need F 35B/Harrier ?
It is designed to operate the F35 and Harrier with a Ski Jump, but it is the only (as far as I know) carrier in the world to be designed to be easily refitted to use Cats and/or traps. Given enough warning during building/refitting it could be configured to take just about any carrier capable aircraft. One of the good points about the project, they’re thinking of the future.
I didnt realise the UK still had an air force:diablo::D:D:D
You must not have noticed them because they were too busy actually being used in theatre.
We all knew this was coming, if the money is used to fund the Army then great.
But i suspect this will not happen.
You have to wonder if there is a helicopter shortage etc than how will the UK cope in Afghanistan with a reduced RAF? Or would the plan be to put the helicopters under the Army?
maybe the plan is that by next year the UK will pull out hense the RAF/RN/Army could live with the cuts?
Some of it is hyped, a lot of the “cuts” are actually transfers to the RN (The Merlin fleet for example) with a corresponding rationalisation of bases. The JSF is also only being partially cut to be an RN only force.
Apart from that no helicopters a re being cut, the Pumas are being grounded for a few months but as it is they’re not able to fly in A-stan anyway.
Is this just a proposal or a certainty decked up as a proposal? The UK press doth seem to revel in doom and gloom stories.
Probably just a proposal, to show what can be done so they don’t lose something they care more about in the SDR.
India could do with a few of them harriers. If the Gorshkov gets delayed further and we attrit a few more SHars, we can take yours, put pointy noses on them and play at having a naval strike package. :rolleyes:
It would be nice to see, but the Harriers aren’t going to be cut until 2018 when they’ll be on their last legs. They might be transferred to RN only use though.
UAVs are not being used for COIN missions, for COIN harriers and A10s are being used (ifi recall correctly), UAVs are being used against fixed targets like buildings or departments on pre-planned missions.
They’re being used to track vehicles and people on the ground too, with the decision then being made on whether to engage that target. I’ve seen footage of it happen. In the instance I saw, they tracked a pickup but they chose not to engage because of civilians nearby. However they would have been perfectly capable of engaging with a Hellfire if the pickup had moved away from the civvies.
It most likely is the satcom antenna and it’s probably placed there so it can traverse/follow the satellite without interference from the rest of the aircraft, like the engines and the tail. The farthest it is going to be away from those is in the nose. It also may make sense to put it it there from a weight standpoint, but I don’t know how much they weigh. You also have to take into account maintenance issues/accessibility. There are many good reasons to put it up in the nose.
It is indeed the satcom antenna. I saw a cutaway diagram of the aircraft showing it once.
What I don’t understand is……. if we are so short of Chinooks for Afghanistan, why did we send FIVE of them to participate in an exercise in Morocco ??
“The RAF has sent five Chinook HC2s from RAF Odiham, Hampshire to Morocco to participate in Exercise Jebel Sahara”
Air Forces Monthly, December 2009, pp6.
I know the crews have to train, maintain currency etc – but FIVE vitally-needed Chinooks ???
Ken
I’d imagine Moroccan conditions are a little closer to Afghan conditions than Salisbury plain. We can’t deploy all our Chinooks at once, they are needed for training, the more training the crews get in harsh conditions, the better.
Mantis finally takes to the sky…
This is great news indeed. Now we just have to wait for those pictures of Taranis in flight.
The article mentions something that suggests alternative Mantis designs are on the way. Interesting stuff.
This raises an interesting question: Do military planes generally take longer to go from design to flight than civvies? Never really thought about it myself.
We’d be better off if that monstorsity that is the A400M didn’t get off the ground, then Britain might buy some proper strategic lift. Or we could just PFI it. *cries quietly*.
The A400M must be about ready to fly by now, what exactly are they still waiting on? FADEC is sorted, engine is supposed to be sorted. I know it’ll be overweight and not meet any of its targetsa but it must be able to get off the ground by now at least.
What story are you referring to? You have just written some statement. Any sources or quotes?
My bad, got sidetracked and forgot to put the link in, i’ll edit it now.