Highly doubtful either carrier will carry an airwing of 36, more likely rotating 36 aircraft for a wing of no more than a dozen. Which still gives the RN a bigger punch than they currently have and keeps naval air power alive in these times of austerity.
Yes, but if you want to be able to doploy that size force in an emergency, you need that many active airframes that are assigned to flying squadrons so that pilots can be assigned and kept current.
You can’t have 12 active airframes in a squadron, plus six in an OCU and keep enough pilots current to fillout to 36 aircraft in an emergency unless you have your 12 aircraft flying 24/7.
Fairly sure you’ll find that you have multiple pilots assigned to each aircraft as well.
For example.
Australia has 71 F/A-18A/B’s (54A+’s & 17 B’s)
These 71 airframes are spread over 3 Active squadrons plus an OCU.
Now. You (and Lord Jim) are suggesting buying 60-80 aircraft for an active force of at minimum 3 squadrons plus and OCU (minimum ~48 aircraft).
You then plan on operating these aircraft in an environment where accidents are more likely result in the loss of an aircraft then it is for land based aircraft. Plus because of corrosion, wear on the airframe is likely to be higher then for land based assets.
Plus, even though F-35 will stay in production for a long time, there is the problem that any attrition replacement order will have to wait until the next free spot on the production line, potentially a couple of years after the order is placed.
Seeing some issues?
Sign In
