dark light

StevoJH

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 451 through 465 (of 987 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Navy surrenders one new aircraft carrier in budget battle #2017901
    StevoJH
    Participant

    Sadly this does mean that Ocean will no longer be replaced 🙁

    Was there room in the shipyards in the ~2018 time frame in the first place? 😉

    Actually, that could be an interesting question, because Argus is supposed to be replaced at about the same time.

    in reply to: Royal Navy Outlook #2017982
    StevoJH
    Participant

    So with the current CVF build schedule which yards will have spare capacity to build C1 and when. Am I right in thinking there will be little capacity untill2015-16. With 3+ years to build a ship the another 18 months to comission that means no new ships till 2020-21. So what happens about type 22 all out of service before 2020.

    The first T22B3 is to leave service in 2018 or 2019, by then the first C1 should be ready for sea trials, meaning the crew of the T22B3 can be transferred directly to the new ship.

    in reply to: Royal Navy Outlook #2018173
    StevoJH
    Participant

    FYI, the JMSDF Kongo and Atago classes are built to mercantile/commercial rather than military standards.

    Really? I thought they were Flight 1 and Flight 2 burkes, just built in Japan rather then the US. 😉

    in reply to: Royal Navy Outlook #2018247
    StevoJH
    Participant

    So if you were going to war would you rather have 1 Cavour or 2 BPE’s? I don’t like these ships not built to full war standards it’s risky if you ask me. Front line ships have to be built safely. When building navies now nobody thinks of what will happen if some of our ships get sunk. There is no spare capacity.
    Look at the RN. Take a Falklands take 2, could the royal navy lose that many ships and still fight i doubt it. We need some spare capacity. this is something that seems to have been forgotten.

    They wouldn’t lose that many ships now though. Argentina Airforce and Navy are gutted, Remaining T42’s have the 1022 radar, Many more sea wolf ships available, phalanx for close in defense.

    in reply to: Carriers for everyone #2018349
    StevoJH
    Participant

    Country your carrier is for: Australia
    Type of carrier: CATOBAR
    Weight: 40,000 tonnes
    Length: 270m
    Width: 65m
    Power supply: Integrated Full Electric Propulsion (IFEP)
    Number of Aircraft: 24 F/A-18Fs 2 Hawkeye AWACS 2 Seakings
    Type of Aircraft : As above – using the 24 F/A-18Fs bought recently
    Defencive weapons : 2 RAM launchers

    Except with a 24 aircraft purchase you’d only be able to deploy circa 12 at a time. Not worth the cost of a carrier. Better to spend the money spent on the carrier on tankers, further amphibs or additional MRH/NFH-90’s.

    in reply to: Carriers for everyone #2018361
    StevoJH
    Participant

    To put it bluntly.

    Carrier = Cheap
    Airgroup = Expensive

    For example 24 F-18F’s plus 13 years in service support (including weapons, fuel etc) is estimated at $6 Billion AUD. Thats twice as much as a single QE class carrier end its only enough for a single squadron plus a small OCU (1/3 of an airgroup).

    So the important questions are CATOBAR or STOVL and the aircraft chosen.

    in reply to: Royal Navy Outlook #2018456
    StevoJH
    Participant

    The only way we will ever se Mistrals in the RN is if we do a reciprocal deal with the French along the lines of you build us two Mistrals and we’ll build PA2; it makes sense in asmuchas we have a ‘production line’ set up for the CVFs and the French have a ‘production line’ set up for Mistrals. They would have to be modified to British requirements though, primarily meaning deleting the Dock and vehicle deck in favour of more troop accomodation. RN amphibious philosophy has no need for an LHD, the first wave of troops are landed by Helicopter from a LPH which has to stay mobile for it’s own protection. Once the beach head is secure the LPDs and LSDs can come in and land the heavy equipment and the second wave of troops. Even the USN is moving away from LHDs with the new America class, which although classed as LHAs are really closer to LPH in concept. LHDs are better suited to Navies that cannot afford specialised amphibious classes like LPD/LSD/LPH. A reciprocal deal of say three Mistral LPH for one CVF/PA2 might prove beneficial for both countries, though the french shipbuilding industry might kick up about it.

    To fit a third CVF you’d have to delay FSC another few years, can the T22B3’s and T23’s be run on that much longer?

    in reply to: Price Tags of the Fighters' Deals in 21th Century #2412566
    StevoJH
    Participant

    IIRC that’s the estimated total cost to the Australian budget (not what is paid to the USA) of buying & operating them. As well as support costs paid to Boeing, it includes infrastructure, fuel, all maintenance costs incurred, etc. Hats off to the Ozzies for being upfront about the total cost, but it does lead to great misunderstandings, with that figure being compared with the marginal cost of adding one more aircraft to a production run, i.e. the “flyaway” cost often quoted.

    Try comparing the price of buying a Toyota at the factory gate, before any taxes, etc., with what it costs to buy it, have it shipped from Aichi to your house in Slovakia, registered, taxes paid, insured, then drive it for ten years, paying for fuel, servicing, having your garage repaired, etc. The former is the “flyaway” price, the latter is the Australian cost.

    Definately better then the way you guys over in the UK do it, say with your PFI programmes for instance, or delaying CVF to reduce the yearly strain on the budget.

    in reply to: Royal Navy Outlook #2018481
    StevoJH
    Participant

    We would have difficulty nicking – or more properly – requisitioning any cruise ships, the only two cruise ship I am relatively certain could be requisitioned are the QM2 and Queen Victoria as they are the only cruise ship registered in the UK, all of the P&O ships are registered in Bermuda, so I am unsure what the position of those would be, the rest who knows. Many of the ferries are also flying flags of convenience – the last time I saw an Isle of Man ferry is was registered in Nassau?!?!

    As Bermuda is a British overseas territory, I don’t think there would be any problems requisitioning them, if worst comes to worst you ring up government house in bermuda and give them the money to pay for it, doubt it would come to that though.

    Nassau is the capital of the Bahama’s which is a commonwealth country, doubt they’d cause problems.

    It would be interesting to see where the British owned, overseas registered ships are actually registered, as in, are the majority registered in commonwealth countries of which Elizabeth II is still Queen?

    in reply to: Hawk #2413229
    StevoJH
    Participant

    We all know what the Hawk is!
    But what improvements does T2 include?
    Should Britian get a carrier version for CVF?
    Should we have a ground attck version for Afgan?

    All good replies are greatly welcomed

    Regards Nick

    Glass Cockpit I believe.

    No.

    They are already rated for ground attack, they arent integrated with precision munitions though. Plus the Tornadoes can do the job just as well if not better, and its what they are actually designed to do.

    in reply to: Royal Navy Outlook #2018679
    StevoJH
    Participant

    I honestly think everyone is honestly being a bit too pessimistic.

    – CVF will Happen.
    – C1 and C2 will happen, though the form and numbers might change.
    – Astute is going full speed ahead

    The programs that are at the most risk are:
    – MARS
    – LPH(R)
    – Argus Replacement
    – Diligence Replacement

    I’m guessing MARS may suffer a reduction in numbers, and the Argus replacement may be merged with the LPH(R) program. Anything could happen with Diligence.

    in reply to: RN FSC – C1/C2 hull & armament proposals #2018908
    StevoJH
    Participant

    T45 will get Phalanx as and when it needs it but only if it actually needs it, i.e gets sent somewhere ‘hot’

    As in, keep the things in storage so they don’t get wear and tear unless the ship is actually heading towards somewhere it may be needed.

    If the ship is deployed and its decided one is needed, you send the ship to a nearby port or naval base, fly the phalanx in on a C-130 or C-17 and mount it on deck with a crane.

    in reply to: PLAN Carrier Updates. #2018933
    StevoJH
    Participant

    I’m surprised they didn’t just find an old airbase, build a ski-jump at one end of the runway and build a mockup of the island next door.

    in reply to: Best/Worst looking military jet. #2417165
    StevoJH
    Participant

    F-111, especially when doing a dump and burn.

    Check youtube for Sydney Olympics closing ceremony for a nice video.

    in reply to: PLAN Carrier Updates. #2019160
    StevoJH
    Participant

    I won’t be surprised if the whole thing is photoshopped/

    Why? Its no different from the dummy Invincible class deck at one of the RNAS stations in the UK, or the mockup of HMS Queen Elizabeth’s Islands being constructed at the moment.

    The dummy deck is for training deck crews, the mockup islands are to test the electronics to make sure there is not interference, there was/is a similar mockup built to test the electronic systems of the T45 destroyer.

Viewing 15 posts - 451 through 465 (of 987 total)