I have not seen a single source stating that the external hull imensions would have differed.

Your probably right, they may well just be stuffing more kit in the big box, I’d just assumed that it would be a little larger based on the extras, of course, you could just as easily say the extra machinery needed for higher speed would take up a lot of that extra displacement.

PA2 was to be more extensively equipped, not neccesarily larger.

Well you could present a good case for it meaning either, after all VLS, additional stores space and larger hospital that they wanted has to go somewhere.

What? Please tell me that comment was just a bad joke?

No it was just a quote from another forum member;):D

That Flanker also includes Su-34 that is completely immune to missiles. what missile does it uses for EF to shot Flanker? what was the range of Flanker missiles? I am sure Joust also takes into account lighter airframe of Flanker, Its 11.5 tons fuel load for massive use of afterburner for superior BVR shot, 3D TVC.
Sukhoi has clearly disclosed its consenus opionion through test pilot interview that EF/Rafale/F-18E are inferior to latest Flanker. I am sure they are reading these magazines as Sukhoi is part of every airshow and Saturn has further said they get secret information which establishes that fighter (PAK-FA) they are working on is superior to anything developed in West.

As of yet no but CEC capability is intended, the type 23 are pegged to get it first.

I keep on saying but people hardly take any notice 🙁 but CEC is going to lead to a sea change in Royal Navy anti air capability and is the one saving grace of only getting 6 Type 45. Our Type 45 with CEC will be able datalink with any RN frigate in the area and use it as a secondary AAW launch platform.

If we are clever with the C1 and C2 program and fit them VLS capable of handling ASTER30 we can drop CAAMS in them for normal use but drop ASTER30 in for hot wars using the SAMPSON equipped type 45 to cue them. Even with Seawolf or CAAMS a frigate linked to T45 with CEC is a formidable new capability.

Also if we link the ASAC7 via CEC capability we will get amazing situational awareness, a fly let alone a stealth fighter wouldn’t be able to approach an RN battle group without getting swatted!

Definitely a daft decision to omit CEC from T45, hopefully it this will be rectified later on.

I agree with Mr Beedall’s analysis. The Navy is at the end of a long queue and the Government has just taken on a potentially collossal burden. Remember the total cost of the Bank bail out may be in the order of £600 billion (i.e. recapitalisation funding of c.£40bn, £250 bn of loan guarantees and £200bn of special liquidity). Our total public expenditure budget this year was expected to be c £585bn. So the bill just doubled. Whilst the defence budget at £38bn is not huge (pensions, welfare and healthcare are all about 3x larger) it is not a favourite of this Government. So perhaps my 15% assumption was optimistic?

Sounds like a damn good time to dump the ID card scheme, any idea what the cost projections for that one are currently running at?

Small teams with assault rifles on board the cargo vessels sounds the most sensible suggestion, I’m a little surprised its not actually being done already.

Ah! Glorious equipment decisions! Besides the fact, that the wonderful T45 class has only 48 VLS cells, they are A-50 (of the glorious Sylver, which sprouted four different flavours). A BMD Aster-45 to compete with THAAD or SM-2/IV or SM-3 would be a nice thing for sure. Too bad it wouldn’t fit into the brand new T45’s VLS hive.

But the T45 was designed specifically so that it had space for these sort of future upgrades, personally I expect a ballistic missile defence system is something the T45s will get in the future, when another government has to make the decision.