tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post4998441698822014225..comments2024-02-29T11:45:01.870+01:00Comments on UK Armed Forces Commentary: F35B, F35C, rethinks, weaponry, costs and the difficult choices - UPDATEDGabrielehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-21394501656153607592013-07-23T05:39:14.570+02:002013-07-23T05:39:14.570+02:00Any internal firing of ASRAAM falls into the categ...Any internal firing of ASRAAM falls into the category of "good luck".<br /><br />http://elpdefensenews.blogspot.com.au/2013/07/the-navy-problem-part-2.htmlAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14078985263856873037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-29791323074764265612013-02-06T01:53:42.067+01:002013-02-06T01:53:42.067+01:00Ηі it's me, I am also visiting this site daily...Ηі it's me, I am also visiting this site daily, this web site is genuinely good and the viewers are genuinely sharing good thoughts.<br /><i>Also visit my homepage</i> :: <b><a href="http://1monthloan13.co.uk/" rel="nofollow">1 month loan</a></b>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-19726047214433548872012-03-24T09:54:43.964+01:002012-03-24T09:54:43.964+01:00Hi Gabriele
The plot thickens it appears that the...Hi Gabriele<br /><br />The plot thickens it appears that the Daily Telegraph have confirmd the Gulf News rumour and we wont be hearing about a switch over on Monday !!<br /><br />The USN have provided cost estimates of £548 for the kit and £400 for fitting them !!! (I wonder if some in the MOD were actually trying to cost converting both ships ?)<br /><br />http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9164155/Aircraft-carrier-costs-will-be-half-what-you-think-US-tells-ministers.html<br /><br />It also gives an interesting insight into what exactly the Carrier Cooperation deal appears to entails which i think you will find very interestingAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-68965705174691865432012-03-23T21:40:25.346+01:002012-03-23T21:40:25.346+01:00You're right. At this stage, we are both guess...You're right. At this stage, we are both guessing, I think.<br />Solomon at his blog reports that the US Navy is (again?) considering converting S3 airframes in storage to tankers.<br />That of course is also a way to go and maybe a better one?WWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11739235984426454611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-48849676473530288962012-03-23T13:28:54.726+01:002012-03-23T13:28:54.726+01:00Well, regarding the spares issues, to have an idea...Well, regarding the spares issues, to have an idea of the scale of the eventual difficulty we'd have to know how much of the old Trader remains unchanged after the conversion: with engines and avionics replaced, most of the parts might well be entirely different from those on the old airplane, and available on the market. <br />It might be an issue, but it might also be a problem (relatively) easily solved.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-17004414414307879022012-03-23T13:04:56.650+01:002012-03-23T13:04:56.650+01:00Hi Gabriele,
I was not questioning the qualities o...Hi Gabriele,<br />I was not questioning the qualities of a convereted Trader/Tracer with Searchwater of Vigilance: indeed way better than a converted Merlin or even Osprey with the same radar.<br />But I have my doubts about sustainablity of such converted airframes in high intensity ops. Spares will be hard to get at. That may not be a major problem with the more 'leisurly' pace of Brasilian ops, but the UK need more. Hence my point that the UK may be better off with a less performant but more reliable and available Merlin or Osprey conversion for AEW. <br />But I agree with you, that there is no suitable solution for the tanker issue short of using buddy-refueling and thus reducing the number of platforms available for operations.WWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11739235984426454611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-74136182534734886762012-03-22T21:03:52.158+01:002012-03-22T21:03:52.158+01:00@ WW
On the availability of airframes, i cannot s...@ WW<br /><br />On the availability of airframes, i cannot say much: you might be right, i don't know how many useable platforms are left. Mine is more of a suggestion for a good and cheap option. It does not necessarily mean it is the right way to go. <br /><br />But on your considerations about numbers and capabilities, i have to disagree, if nothing else because, sadly, the RN is going to end up with fewer and less capable platforms. No embarked tanker, and modified Merlin HM2 embarking radar domes on the side (AgustaWestland proposal, with Searchwater radar) or two pods on the weapon pylons (Lochkeed Martin Vigilance, APG-80 derivative). <br />In the case of the first option, we have the same radar the Brazilians are considering, but mounted on an helicopter and thus destined to fly lower and stay in the air for less time. <br /><br />I fear that it would actually be gold all over the place for the RN if they could copy the Brazilian idea. <br /><br /><br />@Geoff B <br /><br />The C is an all around better choice, but as i've tried to explain in the article, there are pretty good reasons why the MOD is hard pressed to take a decision. And there is no money. <br />Unless the government provides emergency funding from the Treasury Reserve, treating catapults as a UOR of sorts, the MOD would have to take an axe and swing it back and forth into the budget cutting relatively small amounts of money, but causing massive contractions in capability. <br /><br />I say it again, a LPD runs on 20 millions a year. The whole Type 23 fleet on 318 millions. <br />It really is dire to claw back money with cuts. <br /><br />As to the F35B, it has not solved all its issues, no, but with the emerging of the tailhook issue, F35B optimists could say to you, not without reasons, that today the biggest risk is actually on the C variant.<br /><br />As to the Brazilian trader deal, it is worth saying that the MOD semi-seriously assessed a similar idea in the early years of the long delayed MASC AEW replacement program. Around 2000, the S2 Tracker was considered. <br />In 2002, the MOD even thought about converting a number of S3B Viking airplanes to buy cheaply from the US. <br /><br />The RN had hoped for 10 to 12 platforms (if helicopter based). In 2003 it was assessed that a buy of 12 new Merlin for AEW role would cost some 500 millions. <br />Today it seems likely that the AEW role will be covered by (some of?) the 30 Merlin HM2, already hard worked and high in demand. <br /><br />And this despite the availability of 12 Merlin HM1 airframes that, with some funding, could be upgraded to HM2 cockpit and AEW mission system. <br /><br />There really is little room for maneuver.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-71971543260573013782012-03-22T20:32:58.657+01:002012-03-22T20:32:58.657+01:00Hi Gabriele
Geoff B here I could accept the switc...Hi Gabriele<br /><br />Geoff B here I could accept the switch if the F-35B had suddenly massively improved over the last 12 months but its hasn't. The current SecDef bottled it and folded to USMC & LM pressure to remove the probation before all of the issues had been effectively resolved, whilst they have improved matters by switch the STOVL testbeds from BF-1 there is still alot of work to do to prove itself a viable airframe. Thus all the reasons the SDSR quoted as reasons for change still stand and just becuase the F-35C has now been delayed by the USN i think they should rview the F-35 as a JCA choice rather than jump from one disatser to another and back again.<br /><br />I suspect you right and they are now factoring in converting both ships to CATOBAR for the hike in conversion costs. I suspect its the fact they can't face the queen to say the ship named in her honour and likely to be launched by her may be destined for an uncertain future after first of class trials.<br /><br />I would have liked then to stay the course with CVF and get at least PoW in service and hold QE in limbo until she too can be refitted. Switch JCA to an off the shelf design and put the F-35C onto the RAF as a Tornado replacement. Then by the 2030's we can either decide to replace the F-18/Rafale with either more F-35C or join the NGAD program with the USAF which may replace our JCA aircraft and possibly Typhoon in the long run.<br /><br />Interesting on the Turbo Tracker AEW/Turbotrader AEW or even TurboTracer AEW ?, nice solution although somewhat limited due to the service life left in the Traders. You would have thought they could get Embraer to develop a naval version of one of its modern passenger aircraft to become a Tracker replacement, which could even have some export potential too.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-48053748689118364762012-03-22T20:20:28.306+01:002012-03-22T20:20:28.306+01:00Not sure that there is still a sufficient quantity...Not sure that there is still a sufficient quantity of usable Trader (COD) and Tracer (AEW) airframes. The better ones have and are still being taken for conversion to fire-fighters and there weren't that many compared to the number of Trackers (ASW). The Tracker airframe is different and maybe not suitable for conversion to AEW or Tanker. There is also the problem of spare parts. I guess the UK would need 12 aircraft for conversion (say 6 AEW and 6 Tanker) plus some for spares: 15 or so in total. Are these available?<br />The Brasilian project is progressing slowly: first it was going to be Embraer, now it is Marsh Aviation to do the conversion (engines and avionics). Embraer may still do the AEW part. <br />For the Brasilian Navy, their carrier operations are all about learning the trade. The Sao Paolo seldom sails with a full complement of aircraft or on 'expeditionary' training cruises. Most of the time it are training sorties within the Brasilain EEZ. They do not need a carrier in the world as it is today. They are preparing themselves for 20 years or so from now when they expect to be one of the big boys in the major league. By then they want two new carriers with modern aircraft. <br />This to indicate that their requirements are limited and these can be met by converting second-hand airframes. The UK needs to cover more than just low-intensity training. They need aircraft to go to sea and intensive operations for 6 or more months. A converted Trader or Tracer may fall short.WWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11739235984426454611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-10233302499923946392012-03-22T18:33:03.206+01:002012-03-22T18:33:03.206+01:00My comments on forums won't affect what i writ...My comments on forums won't affect what i write on my blog, or the quality of my research into hard facts, no worries! <br />Forums can be good to share quick snippets of info, and of course, see good things such as Cockneyjock's photos!Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-69685996119225048832012-03-22T18:30:48.156+01:002012-03-22T18:30:48.156+01:00Hi Gabriele,
Whilst the 'Military ...Hi Gabriele,<br /> Whilst the 'Military Photo's' blog in regard to CVF is interesting,it is in general a chat room where varying opinions can be aired. This is in one way a good thing but does tend to ignore the serious issues,in favour of the more popular items much like the 'Navy News'<br /><br />While your contribution to this thread would no doubt be welcomed,I would sooner read your in depth articles on here rather than some 'dumbed down' version elsewhere.<br />Sorry if that sounds a little arrogant,but just my opinionmichaelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-12016471693426301212012-03-22T18:30:20.089+01:002012-03-22T18:30:20.089+01:00That's the use i envisage for the carriers: ac...That's the use i envisage for the carriers: according to Mer et Marine, a respected french magazine about maritime matters, a CVF in "LHA" role has been assessed as able to carry 600 Royal Marines, 12 F35C or B and up to "three dozen helicopters". <br />The helicopter used for the calculation is almost certainly the Merlin: the CVF hangar is big enough for 45 folded Merlin helos...! <br /><br />Helicopters will be a lot less than that, routinely, but it is great capability. Ocean carries 480 soldiers on a normal day, for example, and max 18 helos. <br /><br />A CVF with a mixed air wing comprising an F35 squadron, Merlin HC4s, Chinooks and Apache would be a formidable afloat staging point for any kind of military operation. <br /><br />That's why i want two, as i will explain in greater detail when i get around to writing my SDSR 2020 Royal Navy piece. <br />And i also agree on the Typhoon/Tornado part... who knows if SDSR2015 will listen at us on this point? <br /><br />For now, thank you for reading, and for your comment!Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-71802058615917206862012-03-22T18:22:25.471+01:002012-03-22T18:22:25.471+01:00Hi Gabriele,
Very good article. Thanks.
My own h...Hi Gabriele,<br /><br />Very good article. Thanks.<br /><br />My own humble opinion, is that we should go for 24 operational F35B for the FAA. (I guess that means ordering about 50 aircraft, rather than 100)<br />Have both carriers to replace Ocean and Illustrious.<br />Operate one carrier with a mixed air group of F35B and Merlin’s.<br />The second carrier, to rotate with the first.<br />I think having both carriers, which can operate as a CVF and LPH, (or a mix of both), with a versatile air group of F35B and Merlin’s, is by far the best option, with the amount of money available.<br />I would also keep one squadron of Tranche 1 Typhoons’ operational. They can operate in the air to air role, replacing a squadron of Tranche 3 Typhoons‘, which can operate in the strike role. That way we can retire the Tornado. That’s got to save some cash, with which we could buy some MPA!<br /><br />Regards<br />PhilAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-30313927369329115572012-03-22T11:51:50.164+01:002012-03-22T11:51:50.164+01:00Yes i'm looking forward to it, I have some new...Yes i'm looking forward to it, I have some new ideas for different sites to take pics from, I intend to step up a gear. The new kit is doing my head in (can't work it lol) I'm a ship watcher not a cameraman lol.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-57216356067210720812012-03-22T11:43:13.925+01:002012-03-22T11:43:13.925+01:00Thank you!
You should be able to have interestin...Thank you! <br /><br />You should be able to have interesting subjects for photos soon, with LB02 moving towards Rosyth on 25 May. <br />May should prove interesting and busy for you and your camera! <br /><br />And i see you've gotten better kit, too, which is great!Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-59655165536428269592012-03-22T11:40:54.534+01:002012-03-22T11:40:54.534+01:00First class mate, thank you. This forum is the pre...First class mate, thank you. This forum is the premier CVF one IMO, there are more like minded folks on it. Looking forward to the planning round stuff mate.<br /><br />PS the Brazilian COD/AEW was an exclusive and a half. Looking forward to seeing you on the new site.<br /><br />PS naturally all my photos are yours to publish as per norm.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-256338548433518612012-03-22T11:32:45.763+01:002012-03-22T11:32:45.763+01:00Hi man! Doing well myself, but as this post proves...Hi man! Doing well myself, but as this post proves i'm anxiously waiting for the announcements of Planning Round 2012, while trying to write some genuinely informative stuff to help people see the difficulties involved in the Planning Round process.<br /><br />But i'll tell you what, i'll register on that forum then, and see if i can contribute to the discussion.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-27386985469325198602012-03-22T11:28:53.602+01:002012-03-22T11:28:53.602+01:00Hi Liger its Cockneyjock1974 here, hows it going? ...Hi Liger its Cockneyjock1974 here, hows it going? I've followed your thread still and I wish you would contribute on this site. i'm still posting photos my friend lol. <br /><br />http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?163878-Queen-Elizabeth-Class-Aircraft-Carriers-News-and-Discussion/page182Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-18793627146884938402012-03-21T21:16:12.945+01:002012-03-21T21:16:12.945+01:00I'm glad you find this article interesting.
...I'm glad you find this article interesting. <br /><br />I talked of the UCAV issue in the very first article i made about the possibility of a rethink back to the B variant, here. http://ukarmedforcescommentary.blogspot.it/2012/03/f35-in-new-storm.html <br />It is most certainly a risk: as of now, the flexibility of a CATOBAR flat top with a big deck is simply unmatched, and with the USN continuing to bet on the CATOBAR carrier, this situation is going to continue well into the foreseeable future. It is part of why going CATOBAR is effectively very desirable. <br /><br />Then again, there are evident financial problems, and i think that the most urgent concern has to be trying to secure the future of both ships. Even if it means going with the B variant, and floating out solutions in the future when need will call for it, because there is not an alternative unless the MOD is given an helping hand by the treasury to meet the short term cost. <br />In absence of such helping hand, the MOD can't find 200 millions a year for 5 years. <br />The whole Type 23 fleet runs on 318 millions a year: you could scrap the whole fleet tomorrow and it still would not be enough. <br />With no margin of maneuver, the MOD is forced, want it or not, to be short-termist.Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-442909239199162925.post-74018177466887018262012-03-21T20:40:14.563+01:002012-03-21T20:40:14.563+01:00Hi,
Very interesting article as normal.
One iss...Hi, <br /><br />Very interesting article as normal.<br /><br />One issue that concerns me about switch back to the B model, that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere is that the carries would be unable to operate any planned UCAVs. I don't know of any planned VTOL ones. So while not a issue in the near future, I think in the time frame of 2030-2040 we would most likely be wanting to operate UCAVs from the carries.<br /><br />Maybe by then there will be a VTOL one or we could develope or own but it seems most likely at the moment that the realistic options of developing a Naval UCAV would be in co-operation with either the US or France and they would both want a CATOBAR one. <br /><br />And I would think they would be unlikely to want to repeat the F-35 program of trying to make a common aircraft with different versions. As from the reports of the F-35 problems it seems a lot of them are from the B model and if that hadn't have been a requirement of the program, things would have gone a lot smoother and quicker.<br /><br />Maybe by ~2035 UCAV/UAVs will have been found to have lots of unforeseen problems and it wouldn't matter to us if we couldn't operate them. But it could just as easily go the other way and by around then, most forces are thinking of switching to a mainly UCAV force. So then we would be faced with having to convert the carries to CATOBAR after all.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com