dark light

kev 99

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 1,460 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: New Jeep Aircraft Carriers? #2002462
    kev 99
    Participant

    The USN Navy only operate 6 Harriers or F-35B’s from its LHA/LHD’s and only part of that fleet would be available at any given time. So, with a fleet of 340 F-35B’s in USMC Service numbers is hardly a problem.

    That isn’t strictly true though is it, they only NORMALLY operate with 6 Harriers, they have operated in a sea control configuration with considerably more than that.

    I would say “cheap” more like affordable!

    Do you mean you “wouldn’t say cheap”?

    While the USN may pay lip service to the word affordable I’d say deep down it isn’t really one of their primary concerns.

    It would likely be only operated my the USN. Yet, Allied F-35B’s could operate from it to support Allied Operations.

    Right so, this is an exercise in providing more airpower for the only navy in the world with a significant fleet of aircraft carriers and LPDs, for what purpose? the USN doesn’t need them.

    in reply to: Taranis to be tested in Australia #2282098
    kev 99
    Participant

    I saw 3 🙁

    in reply to: Your favorite Super Hornet Block III Upgrade. #2282243
    kev 99
    Participant

    Conformal fuel tanks, djcross is right, most of what Super Hornets do is drop bombs anything which helps them with that is the obvious standout.

    in reply to: Trouble with the New forum layout ? #2282257
    kev 99
    Participant

    No real problems other than the layout being ghastly.

    in reply to: F-35 path to UK entry into service. #2237486
    kev 99
    Participant

    cough! UCAVs cough!

    The invisible Elephant in the room. Is the genuine tornado replacement going to be an F35? in 2030? will it be a manned F35? Is that the best we can do? Really?

    Realistically I think we* all know it will be a mixture of Typhoon, F35b and UAVs/UCAVs.

    * Except Scooter of course.

    in reply to: New Jeep Aircraft Carriers? #2002612
    kev 99
    Participant

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think Ocean isn’t even capable of operating Harriers. That probably has a reason that her deck isn’t up to that. Which means that if you were to build a ship like her, capable of Harrier/F-35B operation, your looking at a serious extra cost (and perhaps stability issue).

    HMS Ocean has been quoted as being able to carry Harriers in the ‘ferry role’, from that I suspect it can carry then but isn’t really up to the job of operating them effectively.

    Wiki gives this: Prior to their retirement, Ocean could transport up to 15 fixed wing Harrier[4] aircraft of Joint Force Harrier in the ferry role, but was unable to operate as a fixed wing aircraft carrier due to her lack of the ‘ski jump’ that is needed to launch a fully loaded Harrier.

    in reply to: F-35 path to UK entry into service. #2238204
    kev 99
    Participant

    The ~48 F-35B’s now planned on are for the Joint Lighting Force to equip the two QE Class Carriers. So, I don’t think you can count them as replacements for either the Typhoon or Tornado.

    They absolutely are replacing Tornados.

    Nonetheless, the UK has sometime before it has to make a decision on type and numbers needed to replace its current Tornado Fleet. Yet, my guess is the F-35A or maybe even F-35C will replace the Tornado at some point. At which time the RAF will likely turn over most or all of the F-35B’s to the Royal Navy. That of course is just my humble opinion.

    We have not shown any interest whatsoever in F35A.

    in reply to: New Jeep Aircraft Carriers? #2002618
    kev 99
    Participant

    Putting expensive aircraft on a cheap ship sounds more than a bit daft, especially as no navy in the world apart from the US seems to have an excess of them, they have enought to fill their existing carriers and that’s about it.

    If a country was involved in a long drawn out industrial war (like WWII) then I could see the point in this but certainly not otherwise.

    This just sounds like an excercise in making aircraft carriers as cheap as possible, which seems pointless, aircraft carriers are capital ships and they are expensive for a reason.

    All in all it sounds like what you’re after would be an existing (non-US) LPD/LPH design with a ski-jump on it, but the US wouldn’t be interested in such a cheap and cheerful ship and non of the other Navies have got a large enough pool of aircraft to warrant it.

    in reply to: F-35 path to UK entry into service. #2239377
    kev 99
    Participant

    Thanks to a freedom of information request by RobWilliams on DefenceNews, when it comes into UK service the F35 will only be cleared for the following UK weapons: AMRAAM, ASRAAM, Paveway IV.

    in reply to: Taranis to be tested in Australia #2239384
    kev 99
    Participant

    This forum could do with more Mustelids 😎

    in reply to: Eurofighter Typhoon News and Updates #2242743
    kev 99
    Participant
    in reply to: USN UCLASS FLYOFF #2242817
    kev 99
    Participant

    Maybe RN could provide a “requirements pull” for DARPA’s TERN. Such a need statement from the RN could encourage USN to become a sponsor.

    Maybe but I’m not convinced the requirements would be the same, TERN being something that is being designed specifically so that it doesn’t need to be deployed from an aircraft carrier, the RN wants something STOVL to deploy from an aircraft carrier, it probably wouldn’t be big enough either.

    in reply to: USN UCLASS FLYOFF #2242876
    kev 99
    Participant

    This needn’t be a bad thing of course…. Somebody somewhere is probably already working on it, but in todays climate I don’t expect to see much detail until the F35 is in UK service.

    Even the UCLASS is being specified with great emphasis on starting easy and building complexity in as the system matures. So I think the UK has time to think about this one.

    The bad thing is that a STOVL Adaptation of whatever comes from the UK’s UCAV requirement would be hideously expensive for a very small number of airframes with little or no posibility for exports, I don’t really fancy it’s chances if I’m honest.

    in reply to: USN UCLASS FLYOFF #2242953
    kev 99
    Participant

    Oh well that blows that then. Naval Taranis it is:)

    It’s probably the main reason I didn’t want a STOVL CVF, because we basically have to develop our own STOVL UCAVs/UAVs* if we are looking at unmanned systems from carriers.

    * With very little export prospects.

    in reply to: Bell reveals new tilt rotor #2243252
    kev 99
    Participant

    That picture looks like the ******* offspring of a Blackhawk and Osprey after a drunken one night stand.

    Actually looking again at the tail maybe it was a threesome, but what was the third participant?

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 1,460 total)